9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (1) TMI 967X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s, cenvat credit could not have been denied. Till the time it can be shown that input services have been used by the manufacturer of finished goods, in the process of manufacture or for conducting this business of manufacture of finished goods, the Cenvat credit on the input services cannot be denied, even if the said services are received at place other than factory premises - Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - Excise Appeal No. 85732 of 2014 WITH Service Tax Appeal No. 702 of 2011 AND Service Tax Appeal No. 863 of 2012 - A/87395-87397/2021 - Dated:- 25-11-2021 - MR. S.K. MOHANTY, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) AND MR. SANJIV SRIVASTAVA, MEMBER (TECHNICAL) Shri Rajesh Ostwal, Advocate, for the Appellant Shri Sydney D Silva, Additional Commissioner, Authorised Representative for the Respondent ORDER These three appeals are directed against Order-in-Original No. 106-108/MAK(106-108)COMMR/RGD/13-14 dated 27.11.2013 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise, Customs Service Tax, Raigad, Order-in-Appeal No. US/288/RGD/2011 dated 26.09.2011 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Mumbai-II and Order-in- Original No. 18-22/AT(18-22)COMMR/ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to 31.8.2011 Under Rule 15(1) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 2. Rs. 9,80,000/- for the period 1.3.2009 to 30.4.2009 under Rule 15(1) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 3. Rs. 6,80,000/- for the period 1.5.2009 to 30.6.2009 under Rule 15(1) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 4. Rs. 7,00,000/- for the period 1.7.2009 to 30.9.2009 under Rule 15(1) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 5. Rs. 7,80,000/- for the period 1.10.2009 to 31.12.2009 under Rule 15(1) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 2. ₹ 22,00,000 for the period 1.9.2011 to 31.12.2011 under Rule 15(1) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 3. ₹ 86,00,000 for the period 1.1.2012 to 31.8.2012 under Rule 15(1) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 Total ₹ 34,20,000 Total ₹ 4,36,76,117 Total ₹ 1,32,00,000 2.1 The issue involved in these appeals is in respect of permissibility of cenvat credit on input services that were received by the appellants outside their factory premises. 2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l are input services. The services received by the appellant have been received for procurement of goods and clearance of finished products for export. Therefore these services should be treated as connected with the process of manufacture of final products. Hence credit should be admissible in respect of these services. Reliance is also placed on the following decisions:- Ultratech Cement Ltd. [2010 (20) STR 577 (Bom.)]. Essar Bulk Terminal Ltd. [2021 (9) TMI 816-CESTAT Ahmedabad]. Saurashtra Cement Ltd. [2018 (8) TMI 460-CESTAT Ahmedabad] Ultratech Cement Ltd. [2021-TIOL-161-CESTST- AHM]. Prior to 2011 which is the subject matter of the first two appeals, the services were used in activities relating to the business and hence should be covered by phrase also. Reliance is placed on the following decisions:- Cola India Pvt. Ltd. [2009 (15) STR 657 (Bom.)]. Stanzen Toyotetsu India (P) Ltd. [2011 (23) STR 444 (Kar.)]. Welspun Maxsteel Ltd. [2013 (31) STR 64 (T)]. There is no requirement in the definition that input services should be received within the factory of manufacture for making them eligible for the cenvat credit. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... services in relation to procurement of goods and inward transportation of inputs is admissible. 4.5 Since the services in the present case are received at captive jetties which are used for procurement and inward transportation of the goods, cenvat credit could not have been denied. The decision of the Tribunal in the appellants own case (Vikram Ispat [2010 (19) STR 52(T)]) is distinguishable for the following reasons:- The Tribunal has not considered the case where the services were received at a captive jetty of the appellant as the ground plan was never produced and examined by the Tribunal. The Tribunal has not considered that these services are received in relation to procurement and inward transportation of the goods. Hence on facts they have not considered the implication of inclusive part of the definition. 4.6 We are of the view that the activities of manufacture and clearance of the goods by the appellants were not possible if these services were not received. There is no condition under the Cenvat Credit Rules for receipt of input services within the factory premises of the appellant. This stipulation to the effect that for availing the Cenvat credi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ve expression while defining the expression input service . Rule 2(l) initially provides that input service means any services of the description falling in sub-clauses (i) and (ii). Rule 2(l) then provides an inclusive definition by enumerating certain specified services. Among those services are services pertaining to the procurement of inputs and inward transportation of inputs. The Tribunal, proceeded to interpret the inclusive part of the definition and held that the Legislature restricted the benefit of Cenvat credit for input services used in respect of inputs only to these two categories viz. for the procurement of inputs and for the inward transportation of inputs. This interpretation which has been placed by the Tribunal is ex facie contrary to the provisions contained in Rule 2(l). The first part of Rule 2(l) inter alia covers any services used by the manufacturer directly or indirectly, in or in relation to the manufacture of final products. The inclusive part of the definition enumerates certain specified categories of services. However, it would be farfetched to interpret Rule 2(l) to mean that only two categories of services in relation to inputs viz. for the procur ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
