9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (12) TMI 1299X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ort activity in a greenfield airport - immigration services incurred for relocation charges of the expats - Guest House maintenance - Flower Decoration - Hotel accommodation - Membership fees - CENVAT credit on construction services - Denial of CENVAT credit on Mobile Command Post Vehicles, Projection Screens and Advertising Structures. CENVAT Credit on Passenger Boarding Bridge (classified under CETH 9801), Bridge Mount Converter (classified Under CETH 9801) etc. related to project import - HELD THAT:- It is an admitted fact that the said goods were imported as part of 'Project Import' and in the absence of any such conditions for availing of CENVAT credit as per CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004, as held by various authorities, the same are eligible for CENVAT credit irrespective of the fact that whether it is falling under the category of inputs or capital goods. CENVAT credit on professional services related to Hotel project - HELD THAT:- The Expenses incurred by the appellant includes professional and consultancy fees paid in relation to arbitration, feasibility study for the investment in the Hotel project - Since these are incurred to know the viability and feasibility for t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ney , Advocate for the Appellant Shri P. Saravana Perumal , Authorised Representative for the Revenue ORDER Per : P. A. Augustian The issue in the present appeal is whether the Cenvat credit on the input services availed by the Appellant are in compliance with Rule 2(l) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. 2. The brief facts of the case are during the audit, it is observed that the services which have been claimed as input services by the Appellant were either not covered under the definition of input services or appear to have been used primarily for personal consumption by the employees and such services do not appears to fall under the definition of input services, therefore proceedings were initiated against appellant. Adjudicating authority disallowed CENVAT credit and confirmed demand of Rs. 6,51,26,496/- along with interest and also imposed penalties under the provisions of Finance Act, 1994. Aggrieved by said order, present appeal is filed before this Tribunal. 3. During the hearing, Learned Counsel for the Appellant submitted that the entire inputs were used only for the purpose of output services and are eligible for the CENVAT credit. The Learned Counsel further submits tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s Stockers Ltd. v. CCE, Pune - 1999 (111) E.L.T. 206 (Tri.), where it had been inter alia held that Automated Vertical Storage System or Vertical Carousel Storage System would be classified as material handling equipment under CETH 8428.00 and not as furniture under CETH 9403, which decision was affirmed by the Hon ble Apex Court as reported in 2005 (185) E.L.T. A60 (S.C.). In the circumstances, we do not find any infirmity in the availment of credit of Rs. 1,35,27,963/- relating to goods imported under project imports under CTH 9801. 5. The Learned Counsel further submitted that Goods imported under project imports actually were imported under the chapter heading 84 and 85 of Customs Tariff Act, 1975. Hence, the same qualify to be capital goods as per the definition of capital goods under Rule 2(a)(A)(viii) of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. As regarding finding that the goods form part of the civil structure and these items are either fitted to the ground or connected to the wall/structures and they become part of the building or civil structures, Learned Counsel submitted that such conditions for availing of CENVAT credit are neither brought out in the definitions of inputs or capita ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... meetings, meetings with Bankers, meetings with AERA officials and MOCA officials. Learned Counsel drew our attention to the following decisions:- 1. M/s Sundaram Clayton Ltd. Vs. CCE, Chennai -II 2017 (7) TMI 1162 - CESTAT CHENNAI 2. Force Motors Limited Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Pune 2009 (13) S.T.R. 692 (Tri. - Mumbai) 8. As regards denial of CENVAT credit on Pinnacle Award ceremony, Adjudication authority denied the same on the ground that the said service is not used for providing any output service provided by the Appellant. The Respondent held that, the said service is only in relation to Pinnacle Awards given in recognition of excellent work performed by their business partners, which has no nexus with the output service viz. Airport Service provided by the Appellant. In this regard, Learned Counsel submitted that Pinnacles awards are to recognize the excellence of work performed by business partners which include Airlines, Commercial Concessionaires, Operational concessionaries and authorities etc., These awards are for people from all departments including the stakeholders in order to encourage them and continue providing their support to the appellant so that t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gible as credit in the hands of the appellant. The Learned Counsel in support relied on the following decisions: - i. Toyota Kirlsokar Motor Pvt Ltd Vs C E LTU, Bangalore 2011(24) S T R 645 (Kar) ii. M/s Arris Group India Pvt. Ltd. v. The Commissioner of Central Excise Service Tax 2018 (5) TMI 560 - CESTAT BANGALORE 10. As regards denial of CENVAT credit on Photography service, Adjudicating authority denied the same on the ground that the said service do not have any nexus with the output services provided by the Appellant. Hence, the credit taken on photography bills incurred for various events like 'Daily operation get together', 'Event of Fire Prevention Week', 'World Environment Day events 'Blood Donation Camp', 'Children Day Event' etc., does not satisfy the main clause under the definition of input service' under Rule 2(l) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 and thus the credit availed is ineligible. In this regard, the Learned Counsel submitted that such services are incurred for various airlines and other promotional events, Cenvat credit is available as the same is for business purposes. The Learned Counsel relied on the following decisions ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... involved is personal in nature and the same is not used for providing any output service provided by the Appellant. In this regard, Learned Counsel submitted that Expenses incurred is for the relocation charges of the expats, who have come to the appellant s place on business purpose and also the attestation fees for family of expats, which is incurred is in accordance to the secondment agreement entered into by the appellant. Since expenses are for business purpose, credit is eligible. The Learned Counsel relied the following decisions:- i. Pradeep Deviah and Associates Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Tax, Bengaluru East 2021 3) TMI 1050 - CESTAT BANGALORE ii. M/s Bosch Automotive Electronics India Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Bangalore I, Commissionerate Bangalore 2017 (6) TMI 157 - CESTAT BANGALORE 13. As regards denial of CENVAT credit on Guest House caretaker salary, Adjudicating authority denied the same on the ground that the said services do not have any nexus with the output service provided by the assessee. The same is used for the personal benefit /consumption of the employees and hence do not qualify as input service in terms of the Rule 2(l) of Ce ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ellant personnel and not for their personal consumption and thus such services are incurred in relation to business and are necessary in the provision of output service. The Learned Counsel relied the following decisions:- i. M/s Xilinx India Tech. Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CC.,CE S.T., Hyderabad- IV, 2016 (44) STR 129 (Tri-Hyd) ii. M/s Netcracker Technologies Solutions India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CC, CE ST Hyderabad-IV 2017 (4) G.S.T.L. 10 (Tri. - Hyd.) iii. M/s Duravit India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CCE ST, Vadodara 2022 (5) TMI 1114 - CESTAT Ahmedabad 16. As regards denial of CENVAT credit on Mobile Command Post Vehicles, Projection Screens and Advertising Structures, Adjudicating authority denied the same on the ground that said goods are not used for provision of output service viz. Airport Service., Adjudicating authority to support the finding held that the Appellant cannot avail the credit of duties/taxes paid in respect of the goods which are not used by them for provision of output service in as much as the provisions clearly state that only the inputs, capital goods or input services used for provision of output service are eligible for availing the Cenvat Credit. Hence, the contention of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at as regards Passenger Boarding Bridge (classified under CETH 9801), Bridge Mount Converter (classified Under CETH 9801) etc., and light and lighting equipment. It is an admitted fact that the said goods were imported as part of 'Project Import' and in the absence of any such conditions for availing of CENVAT credit as per CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004, as held by various authorities, the same are eligible for CENVAT credit irrespective of the fact that whether it is falling under the category of inputs or capital goods. 20. As regards denial of CENVAT credit on professional services related to Hotel project, where the Expenses incurred by the appellant includes professional and consultancy fees paid in relation to arbitration, feasibility study for the investment in the Hotel project. Since these are incurred to know the viability and feasibility for the investment in such project, the same should qualify to be input services as held in the case of Ultratech Cement Ltd., (supra). Similarly CENVAT credit on Chartered Flights hired by Chairman and Managing Director, CENVAT credit on Pinnacle Award ceremony, CENVAT credit on sponsorship service and event management services with ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
