9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (12) TMI 1168 - AT - Service TaxDenial of CENVAT Credit - Courier Service - whether the Courier Service and Mobile service availed by the manufacturer for the period from April 2008 to June 2011 would be available as input service in terms of Rule 2(l) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, enabling the manufacturer to take credit of service tax paid on such Courier Services and Mobile services - Held that - Bench of the Tribunal in the case of CCE & Cus. Vapi vs. Apar Industries Limited 2010 (8) TMI 407 - CESTAT, AHMEDABAD has held that service tax paid on the input services namely Courier Services would be eligible for cenvat credit. The said decision was upheld by the Hon ble Gujarat High Court 2013 (2) TMI 276 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT . Further, the Hon ble Gujarat High Court has also held that service tax paid on mobile phones would be eligible for taking cenvat credit vide vs. Excel Crop Care Limited 2008 (7) TMI 160 - HIGH COURT GUJARAT . - no reason to interfere with the impugned Order-in-Appeal - Decided against Revenue.
Issues:
Whether Courier Service and Mobile service availed by the manufacturer are eligible as input service for Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. Analysis: The main issue in this appeal was whether the Courier Service and Mobile service availed by the manufacturer between April 2008 to June 2011 could be considered as input services under Rule 2(l) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, allowing the manufacturer to claim credit for the service tax paid on these services. The Commissioner (Appeals) thoroughly examined the matter and provided detailed reasoning for considering both Courier Services and Mobile Services as eligible for Cenvat credit. For Courier Services, the Commissioner noted that the appellant used courier services for various business activities related to the manufacture of final products, such as dispatching business correspondence, sending bills and documents, procurement of raw materials, export of finished goods, and sending samples to customers. The Commissioner referred to a judgment of the Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat, which recognized outward transport services used by manufacturers as falling within the definition of Input Service under Rule 2(l) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. The Commissioner concluded that all activities related to the business of manufacturing final products made the credit on courier services admissible. Regarding Mobile Services, the appellant provided mobile phones to senior executives for business purposes, and the mobile services were utilized for various business activities like procurement, accounting, manufacturing, clearance of goods, export, and sales promotion. Citing precedents like the case of M/s. J.K. Sugar Limited, the Commissioner agreed that mobile phone services used for company work should be treated as input services. The Commissioner also highlighted that the definition of input services is broad, covering any activity used for business purposes, as endorsed by the Ahmedabad Bench of the Tribunal in the case of M/s. Ultratech Cement Limited. The Tribunal concurred with the Commissioner's view and cited previous decisions supporting the eligibility of service tax paid on courier services and mobile phones for Cenvat credit. The Tribunal referenced the case of CCE & Cus. Vapi vs. Apar Industries Limited, where it was held that service tax on courier services is eligible for credit, a decision upheld by the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court. Additionally, the Tribunal mentioned the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court's ruling in the case of Excel Crop Care Limited, affirming the eligibility of service tax paid on mobile phones for Cenvat credit. In conclusion, the Tribunal upheld the decision of the Commissioner (Appeals) and dismissed the Revenue's appeal, thereby confirming the eligibility of both Courier Services and Mobile Services for Cenvat credit under Rule 2(l) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004.
|
