2018 (6) TMI 581 - AT - Central Excise

CENVAT credit - Works Contract - input services - service tax paid on Railway Siding Track Laying/maintenance work rendered by a contractor - Held that - When works contract services are availed for painting, laying of floor tiles, etc., in the nature of completion of finishing services, these would generally be in the nature of modernisation or repair/renovation of existing structures. Such services would be eligible for credit. Only when works contract services are used for construction of a building or civil structure or a part thereof or laying of foundation or making of structures for support of capital goods, they are not eligible for credit. The laying of railway tracks does not fit into sub-clause (a) or (b) of exclusion Part (A) in the definition of input service. Thus the disallowance of credit, alleging that these services are excluded from the definition, is without any legal basis - credit allowed - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.

Summary

Issues:
- Eligibility of Cenvat Credit on service tax paid for Railway Siding Track Laying/maintenance work.
- Interpretation of the definition of input services under the relevant period.

Analysis:
1. Eligibility of Cenvat Credit: The appellants availed Cenvat Credit on service tax paid for Railway Siding Track Laying/maintenance work, which the Department contended was not eligible. The Show Cause Notice proposed disallowing the credit, recovery of the amount with interest, and imposing penalties. The original authority and the Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the demand. The appellant argued that the Railway Siding Tracks are essential for receiving raw materials used in manufacturing final products, making the laying and maintenance integral to the manufacturing activity. The appellant relied on a precedent to support their argument.

2. Interpretation of Input Services Definition: The dispute centered around the interpretation of the definition of input services for the relevant period. The appellant contended that the laying of Railway Siding Tracks falls outside the exclusion part of the definition, which excludes works contract services used for construction of buildings, civil structures, or support of capital goods. The appellant argued that since the laying of railway tracks does not fall within these categories, the credit was rightly availed. The learned AR supported the authorities' decision, stating that all works contract services are excluded from input services.

3. Analysis of Input Services Definition: The Tribunal analyzed the definition of input services, emphasizing that works contract services used for construction or support of capital goods are excluded. However, services like modernization, renovation, or repairs of existing structures are eligible for credit. The Tribunal concluded that the laying of railway tracks did not fit into the exclusion categories of the definition. Therefore, the disallowance of credit was deemed to be without legal basis, and the appellants were found eligible for credit.

4. Judgment: The Tribunal set aside the impugned order disallowing the credit and allowed the appeal, granting consequential reliefs if any. The decision was pronounced in open court, favoring the appellant's eligibility for Cenvat Credit on the service tax paid for Railway Siding Track Laying/maintenance work.