Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2016 (12) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2016 (12) TMI 529 - AT - Central ExciseCENVAT credit - input services - security service - general insurance service - consultancy engineering services - input services received at EOU unit - whether the the input services viz. security service, general insurance service, consultancy engineering services received at their Silvasa EOU unit, having no nexus with manufacturing activity at the said unit, therefore, not eligible to CENVAT Credit being fall outside the scope of definition of input service prescribed at Rule 2(l) of CENVAT Credit Rules 2004, is justified? Held that: - Undisputedly, the Appellants on the basis of invoices issued under Rule 4A of Service Tax Rules, 1994 by their head office registered as an input service distributor, availed CENVAT Credit at their manufacturing unit. It is also not in dispute that the entire credit relates to the input services viz. security service, general insurance service, consultancy engineering services received and utilized at their other unit. It is the contention of the Appellant that as per the existing provisions during the relevant period, there was no necessity that the input services be received and utilized in the factory of the manufacturer where CENVAT Credit was availed. The Appellants have heavily placed reliance on the judgment of Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of ECOF Industries Pvt. Ltd. [2011 (2) TMI 1130 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT]. In the said case, the Hon'ble High Court was confronted with the question whether the invoices issued by the head office in respect of the services received at one unit, in favor of other unit, would be eligible to CENVAT Credit. Their Lordships, after interpretation of scope of input service and input service distributor held that The law mandates that the manufacturer who wants to avail the benefit of this service tax if he has more than one unit he should also get registered himself as a service provider and then, he would be able to collect all the input service tax paid in all its units and accumulate them at its head office and distribute the said credit to its various units. Merely because the input service tax is paid at a particular unit and the benefit is sought to be availed at another unit, the same is not prohibited under law. I find that the present circumstances are more or less similar to the facts of the ECOF Industries Pvt. Ltd's case. In these circumstances, I do not see any reason not to follow the aforesaid judgment of Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in ECOF Industries Pvt. Ltd's case - CENVAT credit allowed - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant-assessee.
|