9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (4) TMI 103X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... vice Amount (Rs.) (Pre1.4.2011) Amount (Rs.) (Post 1.4.2011) 1 Renting of Immovable Property Service 1,67,42,779/- 87,78,949/ 79,63,830 2 Insurance Services 81,69,087/- 73,79,045/- 7,90,042/- 3 Construction Service 5,64,359/- 5,56,119/ 8240/- 4 Travel Agent Service5,20,445/- 4,81,838/ 38,607/- 5 Interior Decorator Service 1,26,855/- 80,175/ 46,680/- 6 Architect Service 19,776/- 19,776/-0 (b) The rent was paid for the premises used as branch office which assisted in procurement of orders and delivery of goods. The branch offices were also used for provision of erection commissioning and installation service and repair and maintenance service and therefore renting of immovable property service clearly fell within the scope of input service as per the definition given in Rule 2(l) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. He cited the following judgments in support of his contention: (i) M/s Oracle Granito Ltd. vs. CCE, Ahmedabad - 2013-TIOL-822-CESTAT-AHM (ii) M/s National Engineering Industries Ltd. vs. CCE - 2012-TIOL-2053-CESTAT-DEL (iii) M/s Savita Oil Technologies Ltd. vs. CCE - 2014-TIOL-114-CESTAT-MUM (iv) M/s Wipro Limited vs. CCE, Bangalore (CESTAT Bangal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... erefore qualified to be input service. It cited the following judgments in its support. (i) CCE, Bhavanagar vs. Nirma Limited - 2012 (277) ELT 207 (Tri. Ahmd.) (ii) CCE&ST, LTU vs. Lupin Ltd - 2012 (285) ELT 221 (Tri. Mum.) (iii) Pepsico India Holdings Pvt. Ltd. vs. CCE - 2012-TIOL-2045-CESTAT-BANG 3. Ld. DR on the other hand essentially reiterated the contents of the impugned order and stated that the insurance services in respect of goods beyond the place of removal would not clearly be eligible for cenvat credit. 4. We have considered the contentions of both sides. The cenvat credit in respect of renting of immovable property was denied on the ground that renting of immovable property service relating only to the office of the factory could be eligible for such credit and that the said service was utilised beyond the place of removal and hence credit in respect thereof is not admissible. We find that the adjudicating authority has not dealt with the contention of the appellant that the branch offices which were taken on rent were used not only for procuring orders and delivery of the goods but also for provision of erection commissioning and installation service and rep ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r the provision of one or more of the specified services; or (B) Specified in sub-clauses (d), (o), (zo) and (zzzzj) of clause (105) of section 65 of the Finance Act, in so far as they relate to a motor vehicle is available as capital goods; or (C)Such as those provided in relation to outdoor catering, beauty treatment, health services, cosmetic and plastic surgery, membership of a club, health and fitness centre, life insurance, health insurance and travel benefits extended to employees on vacation such as Leave or Home Travel Concession, when such services are used primarily for personal use or consumption of any employee;" 5. The aforesaid definitions clearly state that input service inter-alia means any service used by provider of taxable service for providing an output service. The appellant contended that it used the branch offices which were taken on rent, not only for procurement of orders and delivery of goods but also for provision of ECIS and repair and maintenance service. This contention has been duly recorded in the impugned order but has not been adverted to and dealt with by the adjudicating authority. CESTAT in the case of Oracle Granito Ltd. (supra), Bharat F ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Thus the insurance policies except to the extent they cover journey of goods from the place of removal onwards would be covered within the scope of input service. 7. The input credit in respect of construction service has been denied on the ground that the same is not related to modernisation, renovation or repair of factory and has no nexus with the manufacturing activity. We find that the construction service in question was used for dismantling of building and construction of storage shed. In this regard we find that as per Rule 2(l) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 input service also includes service in relation to setting up, modernization, renovation or repairs of a factory. In the case of Bellsonica Auto Components India Pvt Ltd, vs. CCE - 2014-TIOL-430-CESTAT-DEL it was held that service used in relation to construction of office premises within the factory would be covered under the definition of input service as the definition is wide enough to do so. Revenue's appeal against this order was set-aside by Punjab and Haryana High Court - 2015-TIOL-300-P&H-ST. In the case of CCE, Delhi-III vs. Mark Exhaust Systems Ltd. - 2015 (39) STR 351 (Tri. Del.) CESTAT held that settin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
