9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (11) TMI 724 - HC - Service TaxCENVAT Credit - input services - place of removal - Training and Coaching Service - IT(Software) Services - CHA and Cargo Handling Services for Export - Warehouse and Storage services - land Survey Service - Hotel Broadway Services - HELD THAT - The co-ordinate Bench in Maruti Suzuki's case 2016 (11) TMI 237 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT has held that the service tax was being paid on the Mandap Keeper services and Rent-a-Cab services and resultantly, it was held that it is part of the business expenditure incurred by the assessee to promote the sales and for efficiently running of the business and the appeals of the Revenue were dismissed. Resultantly, considering the fact that the co-ordinate Benches have already examined the aspect of the expansive view which has to be taken and the fact that the service is required as it is not only used in relation to manufacturing but also regarding the advertisement, sales promotion and storage, place of removal including recruitment, quality control coaching and training and computer network. The transportation of inputs or capital goods and outward transportation upto the place of removal are, thus, provided under Section 2(l) - The aspect of removal has also been clarified by the circular dated 28.02.2015 issued by the Ministry of Finance that it is to be given from the Port/ICD/CFS and only when the shipping bill is filed by the manufacturer or exporter or goods are handed over to the shipping line, the exporter would have no control over the goods. The Cenvat Credit has been rightly granted to large extent by the Commissioner and the benefit which had been declined has been rightly allowed by the Tribunal by modifying the order of the Commissioner. There are no question of law arising for consideration as projected by counsel for the appellant-revenue - appeal dismissed.
Issues Involved:
1. Entitlement to CENVAT credit for various services. 2. Correctness of the Tribunal's decision in upholding the adjudicating officer's order. 3. Perceived errors in the Tribunal's order dated 21.02.2019. Summary: Issue 1: Entitlement to CENVAT credit for various services The Tribunal allowed the respondent-assessee's appeal and dismissed the revenue's appeal, holding that services availed prior to 01.04.2011 were eligible for credit under Rule 2(l) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. The services included technical assistance for engineering design, development, manufacture, testing, quality control, sale of goods, and after-sale service. The credit of Rs. 96,17,096/- was thus granted. For services received at Mundra Port and JNPT Port, the Commissioner had rightly allowed credit of Rs. 16,68,71,949/- since the services were for export of final products. The Tribunal upheld this, noting that the port was the place of removal of goods. For services received for ONGC Mumbai, the Tribunal held that the output service of manpower recruitment and supply agency service entitled the assessee to avail credit. For I.T. Software services, the Tribunal noted the integral role of the Dealer Management System in managing data, maintenance, and repair of vehicles, and after-sale service, entitling the assessee to credit. Cargo Handling Services for Export and CHA services were also upheld as the place of removal was the place of export. Warehouse and storage services for exported vehicles were deemed eligible for credit, as was the land survey service used for setting up regional and zonal offices. Hotel Broadway Services were upheld for credit as they were part of a National Road Safety Mission aimed at promoting road safety, thus constituting input service. Issue 2: Correctness of the Tribunal's decision in upholding the adjudicating officer's order The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner's decision to grant credit for services related to manpower recruitment and supply, services at Mundra and JNPT Ports, and other services integral to the manufacturing and export process. The Tribunal relied on precedents such as Commissioner of Central Excise vs. Ultratech Cement Ltd., and Coca Cola India Pvt. Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Central Excise to support its expansive interpretation of "input service." Issue 3: Perceived errors in the Tribunal's order dated 21.02.2019 The appellant-revenue argued that the Tribunal erred in its conclusions. However, the Tribunal's findings were consistent with the expansive view of "input service" and supported by previous judgments. The Tribunal clarified that services used directly or indirectly in relation to manufacturing, advertisement, sales promotion, storage, and transportation up to the place of removal were covered under Rule 2(l). The Tribunal also referenced a circular dated 28.02.2015 from the Ministry of Finance, which clarified the place of removal as the port/ICD/CFS where the shipping bill is filed by the manufacturer/exporter. Conclusion: The High Court dismissed the appeal, finding no substantial question of law arising for consideration. The Tribunal's order was upheld, granting Cenvat Credit to the respondent-assessee for the services in question.
|
