2017 (9) TMI 922 - AT - Central Excise

CENVAT credit - input services - Construction of scrap yard, barbed wire fencing, canteen hall and dining hall - security services at guest house - Held that - on all the services in question the Cenvat credit was allowed in the catena of judgements. CENVAT credit - construction of road and drainage system inside factory - credit disallowed on the ground that these services are exempted - Held that - unlike in Central Excise Act, under Section 5A there is no restriction for payment of service tax on exempted service, therefore if the service provider choose to pay service tax, the same shall be available as Cenvat credit to the recipient of the service - credit allowed. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.

Summary

Issues:
Admissibility of Cenvat credit on input services including construction of scrap yard, barbed wire fencing, canteen hall, dining hall, security services at guest house, and construction of road and drainage system inside factory premises.

Analysis:

1. Construction of Staff Residential Quarter, Guest House, Bachelors Quarter, and Tent House Within Factory Premises:
The appellant argued that the services in question are covered by various judgments, citing cases such as Reliance Industries Ltd. Vs. CCE, Mumbai and TATA Management Training Centre Vs. CCE, Pune-III. The tribunal considered previous decisions on similar matters and allowed Cenvat credit on these services, emphasizing that the services were used in or in relation to the manufacture of the final product.

2. Construction of Road and Drainage System Inside Factory Premises:
The appellant's contention was that service tax paid on exempted services should still be admissible as Cenvat credit. The tribunal reviewed relevant judgments like Nav Bharat Tubes Ltd. Vs. CCE, Jaipur-I and Ultratech Cement Ltd. Vs. CCE, Nagpur, and concluded that there is no restriction for payment of service tax on exempted services under Section 5A. Therefore, if the service provider chooses to pay service tax, the recipient is entitled to Cenvat credit. The tribunal allowed Cenvat credit on these services.

3. Construction of Scrap Yard, Barbed Wire Fencing, Canteen Hall, and Dining Hall Inside Factory Premises:
The tribunal considered cases like CCE, Delhi-III Vs. KML Molding and Hi Tech Power & Steel Ltd. Vs. CCE, Raipur to determine the admissibility of Cenvat credit on these services. Following the precedent set by previous decisions, the tribunal allowed Cenvat credit on these services as well.

4. Security Services At Guest House:
Regarding security services at the guest house, the tribunal referred to cases such as ISMT Ltd Vs. CCE, Aurangabad and Bank of Tokyo Mitsubishi UFJ Ltd. Vs. CCE, New Delhi. Citing these precedents, the tribunal allowed Cenvat credit on security services provided at the guest house.

In conclusion, the tribunal found that the lower authorities had incorrectly denied Cenvat credit on the mentioned services. Based on the analysis of relevant judgments and legal provisions, the tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, setting aside the impugned order and allowing the appeal.