2018 (5) TMI 488 - AT - Service Tax

CENVAT credit - input services - beauty treatment - Health club - Rent A cab - Tour Operators - Rail Travel Agent - Mandap Keeper - Outdoor caterers - interior decorators - Pandal and Shamiana Contractors - denial on account of nexus - Held that - The Mandap keeper were used for arranging sales promotion events, seminars and sessions with channel partners, business meetings which are required for business operations - In case of Endurance Technologies 2013 (32) STR 95 (TRI) the credit on Mandap keepers were allowed as the same were used for Annual day celebrations - credit allowed. Outdoor caterer service - Held that - the same has been used for canteen facilities to the visiting customers and service providers. Further the services were used for arranging food during training sessions, sales promotion events, business seminars, meeting with channel partners which are in turn required to execute various business activities and endaveours - all these activities are related with business activities only and hence the credit is available to the Appellant. Pandal or Shamiana Contractor Service - Held that - the services has been used for marketing or promotional events and hence it has to be considered as Input Service - In case of Public Creation Services we find that it was used by corporate image improvement and maintaining business relations. Such service undoubtedly which helps in increasing business is qualified to be an input service - credit allowed. Club and Association services - Held that - The Club and Association services has also been used hosting corporate events and business meetings and they also have to be considered as input service and credit stands allowed - credit allowed. Rail travel agent services - Held that - The rail travel agent services has been availed for travelling of employees for business purposes only and therefore it also qualify as Input Service as held in case of Jindal Pipes Ltd. 2013 (5) TMI 244 - CESTAT NEW DELHI - credit allowed. Dry Cleaning Service Held that - the service has been availed for cleaning of furniture and upholstery of office premises which is clearly towards maintenance of office and hence eligible for credit - credit allowed. Health and fitness services Held that - the services were availed by them towards providing health checkup of employees and for Health awareness and Fitness workshop. The activity is to make aware the employees of their Health and Fitness so that they remain health and contribute actively in their work - credit allowed. Sound recording services Held that - the services were availed for advertising/ marketing/ sales promotion campaigning which also falls in category of Input Service - credit allowed. Extended period of limitation - penalty - Held that - the show cause notice has not brought out any fact or instance that the Appellant had availed the credit with the malfide intention or has suppressed the facts - there is no ground to raise demand by invoking extended period - for the same reason, penalty also set aside. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.

Summary

Issues involved:
1. Disallowance of credit on input services.
2. Eligibility of services for availing credit.
3. Imposition of penalty under various sections of the Finance Act, 1994.
4. Invocation of extended period of limitation for raising the demand.

Issue 1: Disallowance of credit on input services:
The Appellant, engaged in providing telecommunication services, faced a show cause notice alleging wrongful availment of credit on input services not directly related to their output services. The adjudicating authority disallowed credit on services like beauty treatment, health club, and others, deeming them not essential for business operations. The Appellant contested this disallowance, arguing that the services were indeed used for business purposes. The Tribunal examined bills and invoices provided by the Appellant, along with legal precedents where similar credits were allowed. The Tribunal found that services like interior decorators, outdoor caterers, and pandal contractors were essential for business operations, thus ruling in favor of the Appellant.

Issue 2: Eligibility of services for availing credit:
The Tribunal analyzed each service in detail to determine its eligibility for credit. Services like interior decorators, outdoor caterers, and pandal contractors were deemed essential for business operations based on legal precedents where similar credits were allowed. The Tribunal also considered services like health and fitness workshops, sound recording for marketing purposes, and rail travel agents for business-related travel as eligible for credit. The Tribunal found that the Appellant had valid reasons for utilizing these services for business purposes, thus allowing the credit.

Issue 3: Imposition of penalty under various sections of the Finance Act, 1994:
The adjudicating authority imposed penalties under various sections of the Finance Act, 1994, citing deliberate non-compliance with tax regulations. However, the Tribunal found that the Appellant had valid reasons for availing the credits, and the irregularity was not intentional. Therefore, the Tribunal deemed the penalties imposed as not sustainable and set them aside.

Issue 4: Invocation of extended period of limitation for raising the demand:
The demand raised against the Appellant was based on invoking the extended period of limitation. The Tribunal noted that the Show Cause Notice lacked substantial evidence of intentional wrongdoing or suppression of facts by the Appellant. As the Appellant had valid reasons for availing the credits and there was no evidence of mala fide intention, the Tribunal ruled that the demand raised using the extended period of limitation was not sustainable on both merit and time bar grounds.

In conclusion, the Tribunal found in favor of the Appellant, allowing the credits on various input services and setting aside the demand and penalties imposed. The judgment highlighted the importance of demonstrating the business necessity of availed services to claim credit and emphasized the need for substantial evidence to invoke penalties and extended limitation periods.