9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (9) TMI 1051 - AT - Central ExciseCENVAT Credit - input services - Gardening Services - Held that - The jurisdictional High Court of Madras in M/s. Wipro Ltd. Vs. C.C.E. Goubert Avenue (Beach Road) Pondicherry 2017 (5) TMI 188 - MADRAS HIGH COURT has considered an issue relating to Housekeeping Landscaping and Gardening Services and held that Landscaping of factory or garden certainly would fall within the concept of modernization renovation repair etc. of the office premises - credit allowed - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
Issues:
Recovery of wrongly availed CENVAT Credit on gardening services, Time-barred demand, Validity of service tax credit, Interpretation of Rule 2(l)(ii) of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. Analysis: 1. The appellant, engaged in manufacturing UPVC Doors & Windows, availed CENVAT Credit on inputs, capital goods, and input services. A Show Cause Notice was issued for recovering wrongly availed credit on gardening services, alleging non-compliance with Rule 2(l)(ii) of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. 2. The appellant contended that maintaining gardening was essential for obtaining consent from TNPCB, citing case laws. They argued the demand was time-barred as the SCN was issued after two years from the Department's knowledge. 3. The Assistant Commissioner confirmed the demand and interest, leading to an appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals-II), who partially allowed the appeal. The appellant then appealed to the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT CHENNAI. 4. The appellant's consultant argued that gardening expenses, including service tax paid, were part of the final product's value, thus used in manufacturing excisable goods. They relied on various judgments supporting their stance. 5. The Department Representative supported the lower authorities' findings. The Tribunal analyzed the contentions, pleadings, and referred judgments. It highlighted a High Court judgment supporting the availability of CENVAT Credit for housekeeping and landscaping services. 6. The Tribunal found the issue in the present case aligned with the High Court's ruling, allowing the appeal based on the principle of stare decisis. The judgment emphasized the relevance of maintaining factory premises in an eco-friendly manner and the tax paid on such services forming part of the final product's cost. 7. The Tribunal set aside the impugned order, allowing the appeal with no costs. The decision was pronounced in open court, providing consequential reliefs if any.
|
