2017 (3) TMI 622 - AT - Service Tax

CENVAT credit - input services - Outdoor Catering Services - Event Management Service - Held that - the Outdoor Catering Service (canteen services) were excluded specifically from the definition of input services only w.e.f. 01/04/2011 - A reference can be made to the decision of Hon ble Karnataka High Court in CCE, CUS & ST, LTU, Bangalore vs. Sansera Engineering Pvt. Ltd. 2016 (5) TMI 660 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT where it was held that there is no specification of number of employees in order to decide the entitlement of the canteen services for credit - credit allowed - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.

Summary

Issues:
1. Eligibility of 'Outdoor Catering Services' for Cenvat credit.
2. Eligibility of 'Event Management Service' for Cenvat credit.

Eligibility of 'Outdoor Catering Services' for Cenvat credit:
The appellant, engaged in providing taxable services, sought credit on 'Outdoor Catering Services' and 'Event Management Service' under the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. The dispute arose as the lower authorities denied credit, stating these services did not fall under the definition of "input services" for providing the output service of Telephone Services. The appellant argued that both services were integral to their business operations. The Tribunal referred to precedents and the decision of the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court, emphasizing that 'Outdoor Catering Services' were eligible for credit during the relevant period. The Tribunal cited various decisions supporting the eligibility of 'Outdoor Catering Services' for credit, setting aside the lower authorities' decision.

Eligibility of 'Event Management Service' for Cenvat credit:
Regarding the eligibility of 'Event Management Service' for credit, the Tribunal referenced previous cases to establish its eligibility for credit. Citing decisions from the Tribunal, the Tribunal concluded that the denial of credit on 'Event Management Service' was not legally sustainable. Relying on the precedent set in the mentioned cases, the Tribunal allowed the appeal, overturning the decision of the lower authorities. The Tribunal emphasized that the denial of credits for both services was not legally justified and set aside the impugned order, thereby allowing the appeal.

In conclusion, the Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, allowing the appeal and setting aside the order that denied Cenvat credit on 'Outdoor Catering Services' and 'Event Management Service'. The judgment highlighted the broad definition of input services and cited various precedents to support the eligibility of these services for credit during the relevant period.