2014 (3) TMI 567 - HC - Service Tax

CENVAT Credit on GTA services - upto the place of removal - scope of the terms means and includes - Rule 2(l) of CCR - Held that - main body of the definition of term input service is wide and expansive and covers variety of services utilized by the manufacturer. By no stretch of imagination can it be stated that outward transportation service would not be a service used by the manufacturer for clearance of final products from the place of removal. When we hold that outward transportation would be an input service as covered in the expression means part of the definition, it would be difficult to exclude such service on the basis of any interpretation that may be offered of the later portion of the definition which is couched in the expression includes . As already observed, it is held in several decisions that the expression includes cannot be used to oust any activity from the main body of the definition if it is otherwise covered by the expression means . In other words, the expression includes followed by means in any definition is generally understood to be expanding the definition of the term to make it exhaustive, but in no manner can the expression includes be utilized to limit the scope of definition provided in the main body of the definition. To our mind this was also not the intention of the Legislature in the present case - Following decision of COMMISSIONER OF C. EX. & CUSTOMS Versus PARTH POLY WOOVEN PVT. LTD. 2011 (4) TMI 975 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT - Decided against Revenue.

Summary

Issues:
1. Interpretation of the term "input service" in relation to transport service for clearance of goods.
2. Reconsideration of the judgment in Parth Polly Wooven Pvt. Ltd.
3. Compliance with conditions laid down in Board's Circular No. 97/8/2007ST.

Issue 1 - Interpretation of the term "input service": The appeal raised questions regarding the inclusion of transport service for clearance of goods within the definition of "input service." The court referred to the decision in Parth Polly Wooven Pvt. Ltd. where it was held that the term "input service" includes any service used directly or indirectly in the manufacture or clearance of final products from the place of removal. The court emphasized that the definition is broad and covers various services utilized by the manufacturer, including outward transportation service. The court rejected the argument that the later part of the definition limits outward transport service only up to the place of removal, stating that the main body of the definition is expansive and inclusive. The court noted the amendment to the definition post-1.4.08 but refrained from making observations on its impact in the present case, ultimately dismissing the appeal as no new grounds were presented for reconsideration.

Issue 2 - Reconsideration of the judgment in Parth Polly Wooven Pvt. Ltd.: The court observed that the questions raised in the appeal were already covered by the decision in Parth Polly Wooven Pvt. Ltd. The counsel for the Revenue did not dispute this fact. The issue pertained to whether the transport service for clearance of goods falls under the definition of "input service," as discussed in the earlier judgment. The court reiterated the broad interpretation of the term "input service" and the inclusion of outward transportation service within its ambit based on the previous decision.

Issue 3 - Compliance with conditions in Board's Circular No. 97/8/2007ST: The appeal questioned the Tribunal's decision to allow the respondent's appeal without fulfilling the conditions laid down in Board's Circular No. 97/8/2007ST. However, the court's analysis primarily focused on the interpretation of the term "input service" and its application to the transport service for clearance of goods, ultimately leading to the dismissal of the appeal due to the absence of new grounds for reconsideration.