2018 (2) TMI 472 - AT - Central Excise

CENVAT credit - input services - catering, maintenance and house keeping services provided to guest house - wharfage charges - water service by tankers - Held that - The issue in hand is being respect of input services rendered at guest house having been decided by this Tribunal in the case of JSW Steel (SALAV) Ltd. 2016 (8) TMI 450 - CESTAT MUMBAI and on such services, the cenvat credit is available to the Appellant herein. Wharfage charges for the goods cleared for export - Held that - the Division Bench of this Tribunal in the case of C.C.E., Indore Vs. Suraj Impex (India) Pvt. Ltd. 2015 (11) TMI 1415 - CESTAT NEW DELHI has considered that such service tax paid under the port services is eligible to be availed as cenvat credit. Water supply service rendered by the service provider - Held that - since the cenvat credit of the service tax paid on water supply, such service needs to be considered from the angle for which such service has been used. Without expressing any opinion on this point, the matter is remanded to the adjudicating authority to be considered this issue after following the principle of natural justice. Appeal allowed in part and part matter on remand.

Summary

Issues: Denial of cenvat credit on catering, maintenance, housekeeping services; wharfage charges; and water service by tankers.

In this judgment by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT AHMEDABAD, the issue revolves around the denial of cenvat credit on specific services. The Revenue argues that the services provided are not related to the manufacture of the Appellant, hence not falling under the definition of 'input service.' The services in question include catering, maintenance, and housekeeping services for a guest house, wharfage charges, and water service by tankers. The Revenue contends that the guest house services are unnecessary as it is adjacent to the factory, wharfage charges are for goods exported, and water supply is for pollution control in a copper cathode manufacturing facility.

Upon review, the Tribunal finds that the service tax liability on services received at the guest house is admissible, citing a previous judgment in favor of the Appellant. The Tribunal distinguishes a judgment provided by the Revenue related to services at a residential colony, not a guest house. It confirms that cenvat credit is available for services at the guest house based on precedent.

Regarding cenvat credit for wharfage charges, the Tribunal refers to a previous decision where such charges were deemed eligible for credit under port services. It clarifies that the service tax liability was discharged under the port service category, affirming the eligibility for cenvat credit.

However, concerning the cenvat credit on water supply services, the Tribunal notes that the lower authorities did not address this claim. It remands the matter back to the adjudicating authority for further consideration, emphasizing the need to evaluate the usage of the water service to determine its eligibility for cenvat credit.

Ultimately, the Tribunal disposes of the appeal, upholding the cenvat credit for services at the guest house and wharfage charges while remanding the decision on the water supply service for further review by the adjudicating authority.