Home Case Index All Cases Service Tax Service Tax + AT Service Tax - 2013 (12) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2013 (12) TMI 384 - AT - Service TaxDenial of refund claim - Denial of CENVAT Credit - Notification No.5/2006 (EX(NT), dated 14.03.2006 - Whether services were input services - Held that:- credit denied on the ground that this invoice is for the purchase of equipment and not for services received - appellant is receiving the services from M/s. American Express (I) Pvt. Ltd. and the said company has received the service of rent-a-cab/car rental services and the service tax on these services were provided the service provided. These services were utilised by M/s. American Express (I) Pvt. Ltd. and not by the appellant. The fact that these expenses are re-imbursed by the appellant to M/s. American Express (I) Pvt. Ltd. does not make them eligible to CENVAT credit in respect of these services. The original authority has denied the credit on these invoices as the nature of the services are not clear. The invoices in question referred to the words ‘Real Estate Agents’ along with their service tax registration number. The Commissioner (Appeals) after going through the service agreement came to the conclusion that the service agreement nowhere mentions the ‘Real Estate Agents’ service, whereas the invoices in question referred to ‘Real Estate Agents’ service. These invoices cannot be connected to the service agreement. In the absence of which, the Commissioner (Appeals) has rightly denied the CENVAT credit to the appellant. Commissioner (Appeals) did not treat services on ‘movers and packers’ as input services in the absence of any evidence to the fact that shifting of goods from the guest house or guard hut from one premises to another was in any way related to rendering of the output services. Accordingly, I find no infirmity in the findings of the Commissioner (Appeals) in denying the CENVAT credit to the appellant - Decided against assessee.
|