Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2017 (1) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (1) TMI 605 - AT - Central ExciseCENVAT credit - LC charges and banking charges - Telephone & Fax services - Postage and courier services - Insurance services - denial on the ground that these services are not covered within the definition of input service - Held that: - the issue with reference of LC charges and banking charges have been held in favor of the appellant following the decision of the Coordinate Bench in the case of Lupin Ltd. Vs. CCE & ST (LTU) [2014 (1) TMI 55 - CESTAT MUMBAI], I allow Cenvat credit of LC charges and banking charges. Telephone and Fax services have been utilized by the appellant at the offices of the company. Telephone also have been provided to some of their employees for activities connected with business. The issue regarding the Cenvat credit of such services stand decided in favour of the appellant in the decision relied upon by the appellant in the case of Semco Electric Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CCE, Pune-I [2011 (10) TMI 142 - CESTAT, MUMBAI] - credit allowed. Postage and courier services have been utilized by the appellant for sending letters, parcels and other business communication. Cenvat credit on such services stands allowed in the case CCE Vs. Apar Industries [2010 (8) TMI 407 - CESTAT, AHMEDABAD] - credit allowed. Insurance services have been utilized by the appellant towards insurance of employees as well as fire and marine insurance, the issue of Cenvat credit on such services is also no more res integra and settled in favour of the appellants by the Tribunal in the case of CCE, Bangalore-II Vs. J.K. Fabrics [2015 (10) TMI 232 - CESTAT BANGALORE] - credit allowed. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
|