9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (12) TMI 894X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by the employee. Therefore, I hold that the Appellant has correctly claimed the cenvat credit on outdoor catering services - credit allowed. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - E/50314/2017-SM - A/58182/2017-SM[BR] - Dated:- 20-11-2017 - Mr. (Dr.) Satish Chandra, President Shri Krishna Mohan, Advocate - for the appellant Shri G.R. Singh, D.R. - for the respondent ORDER Per: Dr. Satish Chandra The present appeal is filed against the Order-in-Appeal No.206/2016-17 dated 11.11.2016. The period of dispute is April, 2011 to November, 2013. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the appellant is engaged in the manufacture of sponge iron, H.B. wire, ferro alloys etc. under Chapter Heading 72 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t services of renting of a motor vehicle, insofar as they relate to a motor vehicle which is not capital goods. The contention of the assessee is that motor vehicle is a capital goods, as per the definition of the capital goods contained under Rule 2(a) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. The appellate authority has specifically observed that the said input service, i.e., renting of motor vehicles have been specifically included except in case where motor vehicle is eligible for Cenvat credit as capital goods. 5. He has however denied the benefit to the assessee on the ground that such motor vehicle are not capital goods for the appellant, Cenvat credit availed on the input services of renting of motor vehicle would not be ad ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pellant. 4. By following our earlier decision (supra), I allow the claim of the appellant by setting aside the impugned order in this regard. 5. The next grievance of the appellant is the outdoor catering services, the issue has come up in the case of Hindustan Coca Cola Beverages Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CCE - 2015 (38) STR 129 (Tri.-Mumbai), where it was observed that : 4.1 .......In the present case the outdoor catering service is used in relation to business activities of the appellant and the service is used by all employees in general. Also, the Revenue has not rebutted the contention of the appellant, that the costs of these input services form part of the cost of final product. I also find that the services covered in cla ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
