2008 (11) TMI 161 - AT - Service Tax

Credit of service tax on Security Agency Service used in Residential colony of the company - Commissioner (Appeals) allowed the input services, insofar as Insurance Service, related to guest house get residence of the President of the company - The Tribunal in the case of Manikgarh Cement held that residential colony of the factory situated in remote area and input service for maintenance and repair service are eligible for credit - applicants have made out, prima facie, case - Stay application is allowed

Summary

Issues:
1. Waiver of pre-deposit of duty and penalty amount.
2. Demand of service tax on various services.
3. Allowance of Cenvat credit on input services.
4. Interpretation of eligibility for credit on input services.

Analysis:
The judgment by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, NEW DELHI, involved the issue of waiver of pre-deposit of duty amounting to Rs. 1,22,793/- and penalty of an equal amount. The case revolved around a demand for service tax on services such as Insurance service, Telephone Services, and Security Agency Service. The Commissioner (Appeals) allowed the Cenvat credit on input services except for the "Security Agency Service."

The Advocate for the Appellant argued that the security service provided in the residential area adjacent to the factory, located in a remote area, should be considered eligible for credit. He relied on a previous decision of the Tribunal in the case of Manikgarh Cement. On the other hand, the DR for the Respondent reiterated the findings of the Commissioner (Appeals) and relied on a different decision of the Tribunal in the case of H.E.G. Ltd. v. CCE, Raipur.

Upon hearing both sides and examining the records, the Tribunal found that the Commissioner (Appeals) had allowed input services related to Insurance Service for the guest house residence of the President of the company. Citing the decision in the case of Manikgarh Cement, the Tribunal concluded that the residential colony of the factory, situated in a remote area, and input services for maintenance and repair were indeed eligible for credit. Therefore, the Tribunal determined that the applicants had established a prima facie case for the waiver of pre-deposit of tax and penalty. Consequently, the pre-deposit of tax and penalty was waived, and the stay application was allowed.

The judgment highlights the importance of interpreting the eligibility criteria for credit on input services, considering the specific circumstances of the case and relevant legal precedents. The decision underscores the significance of thorough legal arguments and reliance on past judgments to support the case effectively before the Tribunal.