Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2015 (11) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (11) TMI 1616 - AT - Central ExciseDenial of CENVAT credit - service tax paid to consultant - manufacture of Lead and Zinc Ores - denial on the ground that said services cannot be considered as input service, since there is no nexus between the services and the goods manufactured by the appellants - Held that: - In the inclusive part of definition of input service, it has been provided that “activities relating to business” should also be qualified as a service for the purpose of availment of cenvat credit. In interpreting the expression “activities in relation to business”, the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Ultratech Cement [2010 (10) TMI 13 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT] have held that definition of input service postulate activities which are integrally connected with the business of the assessee; that if the activity is not integrally connected with the business of the manufacture of final products, the service should not qualify to be an input service under Rule 2 (l) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 - In the present case, it is an admitted fact that laying of railway lines between the factory and the nearest railway siding is a necessity of the business of the appellants. Without laying the railway lines/track material, the goods cannot smoothly be transported to their Smelter Division. Further, the expenditure incurred for both the category of consultancy services have been taken into consideration as part of the manufacturing cost of the finished goods for the purpose of determination of the assessable value. Therefore, in view of the principle decided by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Ultratech Cement, I am of the view that the service tax paid on the Consultancy services shall be eligible for cenvat benefit to the appellants. Appeal allowed - credit allowed - decided in favor of appellant-assessee.
|