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

TMI Blog

Home

2017 (8) TMI 358

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ucts - also, there is no dispute with regard to the distribution of the credit as permitted in the scheme of the Act and the Rules - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
Anil Choudhary, Member (Judicial) And Anil G. Shakkarwar, Member (Technical) Shri Devinder Sharma, Advocate for the appellants Shri Mohammad Altaf (Assistant Commissioner) A.R., for the department ORDER Per: Mr. Anil Choudhary Heard the Parties on Misc. Application filed for Early Hearing. As the issue herein is squarely covered in the appellant's own case in Appeal No.ST/3459/2012 and others by this Tribunal vide Final Order No.ST/A/70238-70240/2017-CU(DB) dated 01.02.2017, we allow Early Hearing application and take up the appeal for final hearing w .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... r goods located at Nanjungad, Roorkee etc. under the cover of challan issued under Rule 4A of STR, 1994. In response to audit objection the appellant submitted that Cenvat credit involved on input services used in R & D activities is admissible to them as the said R & D units are integral units of the company, serving the different manufacturing locations (Primarily for Active Pharmaceutical Ingredient Polymer and Formulations) located at Nanjungad and Roorkee. It was also submitted that the R & D units neither manufacturers nor remove any excisable products nor provides any output taxable service to any outsider. 4. It appeared to Revenue that credit of Service Tax attributable to service used in a unit exclusively engaged in the manufact .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ceedings or Apeeal for the earlier period. 6. The learned counsel for the appellant Mr. Devinder Sharma urges that the definition of input service under Rule 2(l) of CCR, 2004 provides Input service means any service used by a provider of taxable service or used by the manufacturer, whether directly or indirectly, in or in relation to the manufacture of final products and clearance of final products from the place of removal. It is further urged that it is admitted fact that the service provided by the R&D centres of the appellant to their manufacturing units is classifiable under the category Scientific and Technical Consultancy Service under Section 65(92) readwith Section 65(105)(za) of the Finance Act. The service is not taxable as the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... vices received for setting up of storage tanks; and whether under the facts and circumstances the Tribunal was correct and justified in holding that services used in relation to storage of inputs outside the factory would not be eligible for credit as services are received outside the factory. The Hon'ble High Court observed that the words used "directly or indirectly" and in or in relation to are words of width and amplitude. Inclusive definition of Cenvat Credit Rules is not restricted to input services used only for procurement and inward transportation of inputs. Rule 2(l) must be read in its entirety and no interpretation can be given which is contrary to the plain and literal meaning. It was more so as this broad and compreh .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e initiated and demand was confirmed as per provision of Rule 6(3)(i) of CCR, 2004 on the value exempted services which were worked out to ₹ 14,50,720/-, this Tribunal has held that in respect of clearances to SEZ, United Nations, there was no need for reversal of Cenvat credit or payment of the percentage of the amount prescribed under Rule 6(3) of CCR, 2004. 8. Having considered the rival contentions, we find that the appellant have rightly taken Cenvat credit as permissible under Rule 3 read with Rule 2(l) of CCR, 2004 as the services in question have been admittedly used by the manufacturer indirectly in relation to manufacture of final dutiable products. We also find that there is no dispute with regard to the distribution of th .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates