2016 (2) TMI 1184 - HC - Central Excise

CENVAT Credit - input services - place of removal - the assessee had made clearances of their final products from their factory gate and receiving the services of Safe Express Pvt. Ltd. and Speedage Express Cargo Service after clearances for outward transportation through Central Excise Department under the category of courier services - Held that - It is an admitted fact that the respondent-assessee had received the courier services for speedy removal of final products to their customer after clearance from the factory. The service provider namely Safe Express Pvt. Ltd. and Speedage Express Cargo Service are registered under the category of courier services. Since the services availed from the courier agency are relating to the business activities of the respondent in terms of the definition of Input Services , the service tax paid on such service is eligible for Cenvat Credit. GTA Services and Courier Services are different from each other - It is an admitted fact that the respondents had received such transportation services for speedy disposal of their final products to their customers and admittedly both Safe Express Pvt. Ltd. and Speedage Express Cargo Services are registered under the category of Courier Service . Appeal dismissed - decided against Revenue.

Summary

Issues:
1. Entitlement to Cenvat Credit under the Central Excise Act, 1944 for services used in relation to the manufacturer and clearance of final products.
2. Interpretation of "Input Service" under the Act.
3. Differentiation between GTA Services and Courier Services for Cenvat Credit eligibility.

Analysis:
1. The appeal concerned the entitlement to Cenvat Credit under the Central Excise Act, 1944 for services used in relation to the manufacturer and clearance of final products. The respondent-assessee claimed Cenvat Credit but the Assessing Officer disallowed it, stating that the clearance of final products from the place of removal should be understood in the context of services used by the manufacturer. The Commissioner (Appeals) accepted the assessee's contention, considering the services as related to courier services, not outward transportation by a goods transport agency. The Tribunal upheld this decision, emphasizing that the services availed were related to the business activities of the respondent, making them eligible for Cenvat Credit.

2. The interpretation of "Input Service" under the Act was crucial in this case. The Assessing Officer contended that the services used in relation to the manufacturer and clearance of final products from the place of removal must be proven to be eligible for Cenvat Credit. However, the Tribunal found that the services provided by courier agencies, in this case, Safe Express Pvt. Ltd. and Speedage Express Cargo Service, fell under the definition of "Input Services" as they were related to the business activities of the respondent. The Tribunal's decision was based on factual evidence and the definition of courier agencies provided by the Board's Circular.

3. Another significant issue was the differentiation between GTA Services and Courier Services for Cenvat Credit eligibility. The Tribunal clarified that GTA services and courier services are distinct, with Express Cargo Service falling under the definition of a courier agency. Referring to the Board's Circular, the Tribunal highlighted that even transporters providing cargo transportation on a door-to-door basis within a short time frame are considered courier agencies. As both Safe Express Pvt. Ltd. and Speedage Express Cargo Service were registered under the category of courier services, the Tribunal concluded that the service tax paid on such services was eligible for Cenvat Credit. The appeal was dismissed as it lacked merit and failed to establish any substantial question of law challenging the Tribunal's findings.