2016 (8) TMI 897 - AT - Service Tax

CENVAT credit manufacturer of oil seeds input services under Rule 2(l) of CENVAT Credit Rules 2004 - outdoor catering rent-a-cab hotel booking expenses car maintainance charges Held that - the issue is no more res-integra and is already covered in various decisions. In the appellant s own case, the Tribunal vide its order dated 14.08.2013 has allowed the credit of CENVAT on outdoor catering and rent a cab services and similarly by other decisions of the Tribunal, hotel booking services and car maintenance services were also allowed as they are directly related to business and hence CENVAT Credit is available being input service appeal disposed off decided in favor of appellant.

Summary

Issues:
Appeal against denial of CENVAT Credit on service tax paid for out-door catering, rent-a-cab, hotel booking expenses, and car maintenance charges.

Analysis:
1. The appellant filed three appeals challenging the order-in-appeal that rejected their appeal and upheld the order-in-original denying CENVAT Credit on various services. The appeals covered the period from November 2004 to June 2008, with different amounts denied and penalties imposed.

2. The departmental audit party found irregular availing of service tax input credit on catering, rent-a-cab, hotel booking, and car maintenance services, not meeting the definition of input service under CENVAT Credit Rules 2004. Show-cause notices were issued, leading to the order-in-original denying the credit, upheld by the Commissioner. The appellant contended that similar issues were settled in their favor in previous tribunal cases and cited relevant precedents.

3. The appellant relied on tribunal decisions favoring them in cases related to out-door catering, rent-a-cab, hotel booking, and car maintenance services. They argued that the denial of credit was purely on a legal basis, not due to lack of documentation on service usage. Relevant case laws were cited to support their position. The respondent reiterated the findings in the impugned order and cited other decisions in support of the denial of credit.

4. The issues raised in the present case had been previously addressed in various tribunal decisions and a Karnataka High Court case. The Tribunal had previously allowed CENVAT Credit on similar services in the appellant's case and other decisions, establishing the direct relation of these services to the business, making them eligible for CENVAT Credit. Consequently, the appellant's appeals were allowed, setting aside the impugned order with any consequential relief.

(Order pronounced in open court on 23/08/2016)