2017 (11) TMI 1803 - AT - Service Tax

CENVAT credit - input services - inward transportation of new motor cycles from the plant of the showroom and not to the Authorized Service Centre - Held that - Input service means any service used by a provider of output service for providing an output service - The transportation of new motor cycles to the showroom is not related to carrying out any service or repair of vehicles manufactured by the manufacturer. Hence, the appellant is not eligible for availing the Cenvat credit - credit cannot be allowed - appeal dismissed - decided against appellant.

Summary

Issues:
- Eligibility of input service credit for transportation of new motor cycles to the showroom under the category of "Servicing of Motor Vehicles."

Analysis:
The case involved a dispute regarding the eligibility of availing input service credit by a service provider under the category of "Servicing of Motor Vehicles" for the transportation of new motor cycles to the showroom. The appellant had availed input service credit on inward transportation of new motor cycles from the plant of the showroom, which was challenged through a show cause notice. The adjudicating authority confirmed the demand, but the Commissioner (Appeals) set aside the order and allowed the appeal filed by the Revenue.

Upon hearing both sides and examining the appeal records, the Member analyzed the definition of "authorized service station" under Section 65(9) of the Finance Act, 1994, which includes carrying out service or repair of vehicles manufactured by the manufacturer. The Member noted that the transportation of new motor cycles to the showroom did not directly relate to providing service or repair of vehicles. Despite the appellant being an authorized dealer and running an authorized showroom and service station, the Member concluded that the transportation did not qualify as an input service for availing Cenvat credit. The Member dismissed the argument based on a previous tribunal decision, stating it was not applicable to the current case.

In light of the above analysis, the Member upheld the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) and rejected the appellant's appeal. The judgment was pronounced on 30-11-2017 by Shri P.K. Choudhary, Member (J) at the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT KOLKATA.