2019 (4) TMI 120 - AT - Central Excise

CENVAT Credit - input services - Group Insurance of staff under Group Gratuity scheme of employees - Professional Service of Company Secretary - Courier services - Construction Services (repair and maintenance) - supply of tangible goods (Crane) for handling of finished goods for loading-unloading at appellant s godown - Held that - All the services are essential for the overall manufacturing and business activity of the appellant. Reliance placed in various judgements like Hydus Technologies India Pvt. Limited vs. CCE 2017 (2) TMI 538 - CESTAT HYDERABAD , HCL Technologies Limited vs. CCE 2015 (9) TMI 1037 - CESTAT NEW DELHI , Modern Petrofils Dty. Div. & Ors. vs. CCE 2017 (9) TMI 206 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD , TVS Motor Company Limited vs. CCE 2017 (11) TMI 29 - CESTAT CHENNAI and India Pesticides Limited vs. CCE 2016 (8) TMI 724 - CESTAT ALLAHABAD . Credit allowed - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.

Summary

Issues:
Whether the appellant is entitled to Cenvat credit for various services including Group Insurance of staff, Professional Service, Courier services, Construction Services (repair and maintenance), and supply of tangible goods (Crane) for handling finished goods.

Analysis:
The appellant claimed Cenvat credit for several services, arguing that previous Tribunal judgments allowed such credits. The appellant's counsel cited relevant decisions for each service type, emphasizing the precedent set by those cases. The Assistant Commissioner for the Revenue reiterated the impugned order's findings.

Upon review, the judge found all services crucial for the appellant's manufacturing and business operations. Relying on the precedent established by previous judgments, the judge concluded that the appellant is indeed entitled to Cenvat credit for all the services in question. Consequently, the impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed. The decision was pronounced in open court.