9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (10) TMI 53X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ided in favour of the appellant in the case of M/S RICO AUTO INDUSTRIES LTD. VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF C. EXCISE-DELHI-III [ 2023 (5) TMI 601 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH] . Outdoor Catering - HELD THAT:- The CENVAT credit has only been denied on the ground that the sample salary slip of one of the employees shows that the appellants are recovering some amount from the employees for providing outdoor catering but this allegation was not there in the show-cause notice and hence, the Order-in-Original has travelled beyond the show-cause notice. Moreover, prior to 1st April, 2011, CENVAT credit on Canteen Services was permitted as held by the Hon ble High Court of Karnataka in the case of TOYOTA KIRLOSKAR MOTOR PRIVATE LIMITED, VERSUS THE COMMISSIONE ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... put Services on which the CENVAT credit was denied are given herein below: Sl. No. Alleged Inadmissible CENVAT credit (nomenclature as per the said OIO) Amount (Rs.) 1. Constructions Services 5,81,135/- 2. Outdoor Catering 6,50,117/- 3. Travel Agent 47,825/- 4. AMC on Photocopy 50,081/- 5. Sify Communication (Broad Band Service) 12,085/- Total 13,41,243/- 2. 2. Briefly th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e CBEC Circular No.98/1/2008 dated 04.01.2008 and held that CENVAT credit has been wrongly availed by the appellant in respect of Commercial Construction Services. He further submitted that prior to 01.04.2011, the definition of Input Service allows the CENVAT credit on construction related services and this has been held to be Input Service in the case of Rico Auto Industries Limited Vs CCE, Delhi- III [reported at (2023) 7 Centax 197 (Tri. Chan)]. 4.1. As regards Outdoor Catering Service, learned Counsel for the appellant submitted that in Para 39 of the Order-in-Original, the Adjudicating Authority has alleged that the recovery made by the appellant in relation to canteen activities and that such expenses do not form part of the cos ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... personal use of the employees, without their being any supporting or cogent evidence. For this submission, he relied upon the decision in the case of Ramco Cements Ltd. Vs CCE, Puducherry [reported at 2017 (5) GSTL 105 (Tri. Chennai)]. 4.3. As regards AMC of Photocopy Machines, learned Counsel submitted that the appellant has availed the CENVAT credit in relation to AMC of Photocopy Machines but the Adjudicating Authority has wrongly presumed that photocopy can be for personal use or business use without their being any supporting or cogent evidence. For this submission, he relied upon the decision in the case of Parson Machinery (I) Private Limited Vs CCE, Aurangabad [reported at 2009 (16) STR 20 (Tri. Mumbai)]. 4.4. As regards Broa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ground that the sample salary slip of one of the employees shows that the appellants are recovering some amount from the employees for providing outdoor catering but this allegation was not there in the show-cause notice and hence, the Order-in-Original has travelled beyond the show-cause notice. Moreover, prior to 1st April, 2011, CENVAT credit on Canteen Services was permitted as held by the Hon ble High Court of Karnataka in the case of Toyota Kirloskar Motor Private Limited (supra) which was affirmed by the Hon ble Supreme Court also. Therefore, the CENVAT credit has rightly been availed with regard to the outdoor catering. Further, with regards to Travel Agency Service, I find that the service tax paid to travel agents for making arran ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
