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

2025 (3) TMI 190

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... s, they are registered under the Factories Act, 1948 and as per Section 46 of the Factories Act, 1948 read with Rules 93 to 100 of the Karnataka Factories Rules, 1969, there is a statutory obligation on the part of the appellant to provide and maintain canteens for the use of the workers. The appellant is also required to follow the procedures envisaged under the Karnataka Factories Rules with regard to maintenance of canteens and also to provide food and beverages to the workers, employees and staff of the appellant and non-observance of Section 46 of the Factories Act, 1948 read with Karnataka Factories Rules relating to maintenance of canteen would entail penalty and prosecution. Apart from providing and maintaining canteen inside the fa .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ue entertained a view that the appellant was not entitled for cenvat credit on 'outdoor catering' inasmuch as said service fell under the exclusion clause (C) of Rule 2(l) and the Revenue issued periodical show-cause notices for period post 01.04.2011 proposing to deny and demand cenvat credit and it is apposite to state that even for the period post 01.04.2011, this Hon'ble Tribunal held that catering services received by the manufacturers in order to comply with the statutory requirement under Section 46 of the Factories Act, 1948 is eligible for cenvat credit. These decisions are in Hindustan Coca Cola Beverages Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CCE-2015 (38) S.T.R. 129 (Tri.-Mum.); Hindustan Coca Cola Beverages Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CCE-2016-TIOL-2223-CESTAT-H .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... able E/20920/2018 April 2013 to September 2013 49,04,400/- No penalty imposed in OIO itself Same order 4. The appellant filed statutory appeals under section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944 before the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka against both the above two orders, and the Honorable High Court dismissed both the appeals of the appellant as reported in Toyota Kirloskar Motor Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CCT-2021 (50) GSTL 286 (Kar.) and upheld the final orders passed by the Tribunal in the appellant's own case as tabulated above. Also, the Hon'ble High Court's judgment was affirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court reported in 2021 (55) GSTL 129 (SC). The present dispute pertains to one of the show-cause notice for the subsequent p .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... counsel submits that the appellant is not liable to pay interest in as much as the cenvat credit availed during the period of dispute has not been utilized and was remaining unutilized and therefore no interest is demandable, in support of their contention, the appellant places reliance on the judgment of the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CCE Vs. Bill Forge Pvt., Ltd.,- 2012 (279) E.L.T 209 (Kar.) and CCE Vs. Strategic Engineering Pvt., Ltd.,-2014 (310) E.L.T 509 (Mad.) and many more decisions, hence the demand of interest is not tenable. 6. The learned counsel further submits that imposition of penalty of Rs. 58,15,867/- is untenable since the entire issue involved genuine and bonafide interpretation of statutory provis .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... x paid on 'outdoor catering services' is not eligible for availment of Cenvat credit. We find that in this appeal appellant has contended that since they have sufficient credit balance of cenvat credit, when the cenvat credit of Rs. Rs. 58,15,867/- was reversed on 01.04.2013, following the decision in Bill Forge (supra) of the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka, the interest on the ineligible cenvat credit of Rs. 58,15,867/- reversed is not payable. Further, since the issue involved is with regard to interpretation of Rule 2(l) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, following this Tribunal's decision in appellant's own case, wherein the penalty under Rule 15(1) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 has been set aside in the Appeal No. E/2754 .....

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