2018 (8) TMI 703 - AT - Service Tax

CENVAT Credit - various input services - Travel Expenses - Transport of Household goods - Insurance - Rent. Travel expenses - Held that - The credit is allowed on this service - credit allowed. Transport of Household goods - Held that - Ld. Consultant is not pressing the above issue and requests that the same may be dismissed. Insurance Service - Employees Group Mediclaim and Personal Accident Policy - Assets of the company, which include furniture, leasehold assets, office equipment, plant and machinery, computers, servers, electrical equipment, laptops, etc., against fire, burglary, peril, fidelity, cash in transit period - Held that - I am unable to accede to the contentions of the Ld. DR for the reason that it is only an interim order based on the facts of that particular case which do not possess any binding value - the denial by the lower authorities is bad - credit allowed. Rental service - Held that - The Bangalore Bench of the Tribunal in the case of M/s. Microsoft Global Services Centre (India) Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Customs and Service Tax, Bangalore-I 2017 (12) TMI 1496 - CESTAT BANGALORE has held that All the services have been held to be input service in various decisions relied upon by the appellant and the details of the invoices have also been given along with the appeal memorandum - credit allowed. Appeal disposed off.

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Dispute over input services including travel expenses, transport of household goods, insurance, and rent.
2. Eligibility for CENVAT Credit on input services.
3. Interpretation of legal judgments in relation to CENVAT Credit.
4. Denial of input services and CENVAT Credit by lower authorities.
5. Application of legal principles to determine eligibility for CENVAT Credit on rental services.

Analysis:

1. Travel Expenses Dispute:
The appellant contested the quantification of demand by the adjudicating authority despite accepting the service as eligible for CENVAT Credit. The appellate tribunal found in favor of the appellant, setting aside the disallowance upheld by the Commissioner (Appeals) and allowing the appeals concerning this issue.

2. Transport of Household Goods:
The appellant did not press the issue related to transport of household goods, leading to the dismissal of the grounds concerning this matter for both years.

3. Insurance Service Dispute:
The dispute revolved around insurance services for employees and company assets. The adjudicating authority denied CENVAT Credit based on the primary use of Group Mediclaim Policies and lack of documentary evidence for insuring company assets. The tribunal, however, overturned this decision, citing legal precedents and allowing the appeals related to insurance services.

4. Legal Judgments and CENVAT Credit:
The appellant relied on various legal judgments to support their claim for CENVAT Credit on input services. The tribunal considered these judgments and rejected the Revenue's reliance on a Larger Bench decision, emphasizing the binding value of final orders over interim ones.

5. Rental Services Dispute:
The appellant provided detailed workings for rental services but faced non-consideration by lower authorities. By referencing a Bangalore Bench ruling, the tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, setting aside the denial of refund for input services related to rental services and allowing the appeals on this issue.

In conclusion, the tribunal disposed of the appeals by addressing each disputed input service, analyzing legal principles, and ensuring the correct application of CENVAT Credit eligibility criteria based on the facts and legal precedents presented during the proceedings.