2010 (6) TMI 210 - AT - Service Tax

Cenvat Credit Input Service- These appeals are filed by the appellants against the denial of CENVAT credit on input services like Garden Maintenance by the lower authorities as per rule 2(1) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. Held that issue already settled by Tribunal in favour of application in Coca Cola India (P) Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Cenvat Credit on garden maintenance service admissible.

Summary

Issues: Denial of CENVAT credit on input services like 'Garden Maintenance' under rule 2(1) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004.

In this judgment by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, Mumbai, the appellants filed appeals against the denial of CENVAT credit on input services such as 'Garden Maintenance' as per rule 2(1) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. The Tribunal had previously disallowed input credit on 'Garden Maintenance Service' in other appeals, but the matter was remanded back to the Tribunal by the Bombay High Court for fresh consideration. The learned Advocate argued that the Tribunal had previously allowed CENVAT credit on 'Garden Maintenance Service' in a case, which had been upheld by the Bombay High Court. The issue was deemed settled in favor of the appellant based on these precedents. The Departmental Representative (DR) contended that there were contrary decisions and requested the matter to be referred to a Larger Bench for decision. After hearing both sides, the Tribunal found the DR's arguments irrelevant as they were based on a decision set aside by the High Court and reiterated that the issue had already been settled in favor of the appellants by the Bombay High Court. Therefore, the Tribunal allowed the CENVAT credit on 'Garden Maintenance Service' to the appellants, setting aside the impugned order.