9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2013 (2) TMI 276 - HC - Service TaxCenvat Credit on Courier services - Held that - From the record, it emerges that the assessee had used such courier service for placing orders, filing quotation for procurement as well as marketing dispatch instructions, issuing cheque for procurement, sending stock transfer documents and also for receiving dispatch instructions from the marketing or the Head Office. The Tribunal was of the opinion that courier services therefore, be input service as defined under Rule 2(l) of the Cenvat Credit Rules - in favour of assessee
Issues:
Interpretation of the term "input service" under Rule 2(l) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. Analysis: The High Court of Gujarat heard an appeal by the Revenue against a judgment of CESTAT regarding the classification of courier services as "input service" under Rule 2(l) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. The main question raised was whether the Tribunal erred in holding courier services to be covered under the definition of "input service" and thus allowing the assessee to claim Cenvat Credit for such services. The respondent assessee argued that courier services were essential for various business activities, including placing orders, sending quotations, issuing cheques, and transferring documents, justifying their classification as input services. The Tribunal agreed with the assessee's position, leading to the rejection of the Revenue's appeal. In a previous case with a similar factual background, the High Court had already ruled in favor of the assessee regarding the classification of courier services as input services. Referring to this precedent, the Court swiftly dismissed the present tax appeal without providing detailed reasons. The judgment reiterated the Court's consistent interpretation that courier services fall within the ambit of "input service" as defined under Rule 2(l) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, supporting the assessee's eligibility to claim Cenvat Credit for such services. The decision ultimately favored the assessee and upheld the Tribunal's ruling, resulting in the dismissal of the tax appeal brought by the Revenue.
|
