2016 (12) TMI 1042 - AT - Central Excise

Denial of CENVAT credit on manpower services - security services - loading and unloading services - running of canteen services - denial of credit on the ground that the services have no relation with manufacture - the appellant submitted that certain Cenvat credit amounts for these services may not be admissible for these services which are not utilized in or in relation to manufacturing. Appellant has not given any breakup of such inadmissible credit. Held that - In the interest of justice order passed by the first appellate authority is set aside and the matter is remanded to the Adjudicating Authority to decide the case afresh. Needless to say that appellant will be extended a personal hearing before deciding the issue in remand proceedings. Appellant should also provide breakup of services where Cenvat credit is not admissible to the Adjudicating Authority and also bring latest case laws on the issue to the notice of the Adjudicating Authority which they wish to rely upon - appeal allowed by way of remand.

Summary

Issues involved: Admissibility of Cenvat credit on manpower services for security, loading/unloading, and canteen; Remand to Adjudicating Authority for fresh decision.

Analysis:
1. Admissibility of Cenvat credit: The appellant, a company, filed appeals regarding the denial of Cenvat credit for services like security, loading/unloading, and canteen, provided by manpower suppliers. The Senior Advocate argued that some of these services may not be admissible as they are not related to manufacturing. However, the appellant did not provide a breakup of the inadmissible credit. The Revenue argued that without a breakup, the matter should be remanded to the Adjudicating Authority for a reasoned decision. The Tribunal noted the lack of breakup and remanded the matter for a fresh decision, emphasizing that the appellant must provide a breakup of services where Cenvat credit is not admissible and present relevant case laws to the Adjudicating Authority for consideration.

2. Remand to Adjudicating Authority: The Tribunal set aside the first appellate authority's order and remanded the case to the Adjudicating Authority for a fresh decision on the admissibility of Cenvat credit. The appellant was granted a personal hearing during the remand proceedings and directed to provide the necessary information to the Adjudicating Authority. The Tribunal clarified that it had not expressed any views on the merits of the case, leaving all issues open for the Adjudicating Authority's deliberation. Ultimately, the appeals filed by the appellant were allowed by way of remand, and the Revenue's miscellaneous applications were disposed of.

In conclusion, the judgment focused on the admissibility of Cenvat credit for specific services provided by manpower suppliers, highlighting the importance of providing a breakup of inadmissible credit and case laws to support the appellant's position. The Tribunal's decision to remand the case to the Adjudicating Authority for a fresh determination underscores the procedural fairness and the opportunity for the appellant to present their case effectively.