Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases Service Tax Service Tax + HC Service Tax - 2010 (4) TMI HC This

  • Login
  • Cases Cited
  • Referred In
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2010 (4) TMI 649 - HC - Service Tax


Issues:
1. Whether canteen services provided in the factory can be considered as an input service under the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004?
2. Whether the CENVAT credit of service tax paid for outdoor caterer's services by the factory canteen is eligible for availment and utilization under the Rules?

Analysis:

Issue 1:
The appellant-revenue challenged the Tribunal's order regarding the eligibility of canteen services as an input service under the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. The respondent, a manufacturer of Injection Moulding Machines, availed CENVAT credit on service tax for canteen services, leading to a show-cause notice for recovery. The appellant contended that canteen services do not qualify as "input services" under the Rules, as they lack a direct or indirect nexus to the manufacture of goods. The main argument was that the inclusive part of the definition of input services should not extend beyond the main definition. However, the Tribunal held that canteen services, being a statutory requirement under the Factories Act, are indispensable for manufacturing activities and thus fall within the definition of "input service."

Issue 2:
Rule 3 of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 allows manufacturers to take credit of service tax paid on any input service received after a specified date. In this case, the respondent provided canteen services to comply with statutory requirements, which were essential for carrying out manufacturing activities. The Tribunal found that the service tax paid on outdoor catering services by the factory canteen qualifies as an input service related to business, making CENVAT credit admissible. The Tribunal's decision was based on the fact that Rule 3 does not impose restrictions on the nature of input services availed by the manufacturer. Consequently, the Tribunal's decision was upheld as legally sound and in accordance with the Rules, leading to the dismissal of the appeal without any substantial question of law for consideration.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates