Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2018 (7) TMI AT This

  • Login
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2018 (7) TMI 422 - AT - Central Excise


Issues:
1. Dispute regarding Cenvat credit availed for advertisement and sales promotion services.
2. Interpretation of Rule 15 of the Panmasala Packing Machine Rules, 2008.
3. Determination of eligibility for Cenvat credit in relation to different packaging of panmasala products.

Analysis:
1. The appellant, engaged in panmasala manufacturing, faced a dispute over availing Cenvat credit for advertisement services used for sales promotion of panmasala in 100-gram tin packs. The Department contended that such services indirectly promoted sales of panmasala in retail pouches, thus disallowing the credit proportionate to retail pack sales. The appellant argued that both products cater to different consumer segments, justifying the credit solely for tin pack promotion.

2. Rule 15 of the PMPM Rules, 2008 prohibits Cenvat credit on inputs used for manufacturing notified goods. The appellant asserted that advertisement services were not directly linked to manufacturing but to business promotion, falling outside Rule 15's scope. The rule restricts credit solely on inputs directly involved in manufacturing, not on services used in relation to business activities.

3. The Tribunal analyzed the definitions of 'input service' under Cenvat Credit Rules and Rule 15 of PMPM Rules. While the latter limits credit for inputs directly used in manufacturing notified goods, the former includes services used in relation to business operations. Since advertisement services were not directly utilized in manufacturing retail pouches, the restriction under Rule 15 did not apply. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order, allowing the appeal in favor of the appellant.

This detailed analysis highlights the core issues, legal interpretations, and the Tribunal's decision, emphasizing the distinction between manufacturing-related inputs and business promotion services in the context of Cenvat credit eligibility.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates