2018 (6) TMI 1435 - AT - Service Tax

CENVAT Credit - professional services used/utilised for anti-dumping representational matters - Held that - It is an admitted fact on record that the Chartered Accountant service was used/utilized by the assessee in context with preparation of review petition for filing before the anti-dumping authorities in U.S. for the goods exported by the assessee - Since such disputed service is in context with the goods exported by the assessee availment of Cenvat benefit on such service should be considered as input service for the purpose of the benefit of Cenvat credit - credit allowed. CENVAT credit also sought to be denied on the ground that the head office of the assesee was not registered with the service tax department as input service distributor - Held that - Such office of the assessee was duly registered with the Service Tax Department as input service distributor and the registration certificate was issue in its favour by the Service Tax Department on 09.01.2014. Since the Cenvat credit was distributed by such office in favour of the assesee on the basis of invoices issued by the service providers subsequently the same should not be denied to the assesee in as much as at the time of distributing the credit the said office of the assesee was registered with the jurisdictional service tax authorities - Credit allowed. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of assessee.

Summary

Issues:
1. Consideration of service tax paid on professional services for anti-dumping representational matters as input service for Cenvat credit.
2. Eligibility of Cenvat benefit on renting of removable property service.

Analysis:
1. The appeal involved a dispute regarding the denial of Cenvat credit on service tax paid for professional services used in anti-dumping representational matters. The appellant engaged a chartered accountant firm for preparing a review petition in response to notices from the U.S. Department of Commerce and European Commission regarding anti-dumping duty on exported goods. The authorities had denied Cenvat credit on the grounds that the service did not fall under legal or finance services. However, the Tribunal held that since the service was directly related to the goods exported by the appellant, it should be considered an input service for Cenvat credit. Therefore, the impugned order denying the Cenvat benefit on professional services for anti-dumping representational matters was set aside in favor of the assessee.

2. The second issue pertained to the Revenue's appeal regarding the eligibility of Cenvat benefit on renting of removable property service. The Revenue argued that the head office of the assessee was not registered as an input service distributor with the Service Tax Department, thus making the Cenvat credit unavailable. However, the Tribunal found that the office in question was indeed registered as an input service distributor, with the registration certificate issued on 09.01.2014. As the Cenvat credit was distributed by this registered office based on invoices from service providers, the denial of credit by the Revenue was deemed unjustified. Consequently, the appeal filed by the Revenue was dismissed.

In conclusion, the Tribunal allowed the appeal in favor of the assessee, setting aside the denial of Cenvat benefit on professional services used for anti-dumping representational matters. Simultaneously, the appeal filed by the Revenue was dismissed. The judgment was pronounced on 26.06.2018 by Hon'ble Shri S. K. Mohanty, Member (Judicial).