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 1268 - AT - Service TaxAvailment of CENVAT Credit - Rent-a-cab service - Clearing & forwarding service - Whether ‘rent-a-cab’ service used by them as conveyance for their employees and ‘clearing & forwarding’ service used for transportation of goods from factory to the port for export during the period of dispute (June, 2005 to June, 2008) are covered by the definition of ‘input service’ under Rule 2(l) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 - Held that:- Rent-a-Cab service is provided by the assessee to these workers to reach the factory premises in time which has a direct bearing on the manufacturing activity. In fact the employee is also entitled to conveyance allowance. It also would form part of a condition of service and the amounts spent on the conveyance of the employees is also a factor which will be taken into consideration by the employees in fixing the price of the final product. By no stretch of imagination can it be construed as a welfare measure. It is a basic necessity. To ensure that the work force comes on time at the work place, the employers have taken this measure which has a direct bearing on the manufacturing activity. At any rate it is an activity relating to business - appellant is entitled to Cenvat credit on rent-a-cab service used for conveyance of their employees to and from factory. In respect of the export consignments, the Bill of Lading inter alia serves as the document indicating ownership - incurring the freight and incurring charges for transit insurance could not be a sole consideration to decide the ownership or the point of the sale of the goods. In the present case, undisputedly, the ownership transfer takes place through Bill of Lading, which is issued at the port of export after loading of the goods on board the ship - Therefore view taken by the lower authorities against the party in relation to C & F service cannot be sustained - Following decision of COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, MADURAI Versus M/s STANGL PICKLES & PRESERVES [2011 (2) TMI 462 - CESTAT, CHENNAI] and Commissioner v. Stanzen Toyotetsu India (P) Ltd. [2011 (4) TMI 201 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT] - Decided in favour of assessee.
|