2018 (4) TMI 1163 - AT - Central Excise

CENVAT credit - input services - sales commission - Held that - identical issue has come up before the Tribunal in the case of National Engineering Industries Ltd. vs. CCE&ST, Jaipur-I 2017 (12) TMI 433 - CESTAT NEW DELHI , where reliance placed in the case of M/s Mangalam Cement Ltd. Vs. CCE, Udaipur 2017 (12) TMI 426 - CESTAT NEW DELHI , where it was held that CBEC vide Circular No.943/4/2011-CX. Dated 29/04/2011 has clarified that CENVAT credit is admissible on the services of the sale of the dutiable goods on commission basis - credit allowed - appeal dismissed - decided against Revenue.

Summary

Issues:
Appeals filed by Revenue against order-in-appeal; Dispute over cenvat credit on sales commission.

Analysis:
The judgment by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT New Delhi involved appeals by the Revenue against an order-in-appeal passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), Jaipur. The issue at hand in all the appeals was the dispute regarding cenvat credit on sales commission. The respondent-assessee, engaged in manufacturing ball and roller bearings, availed credit on the sales commission as an input service. However, the lower authority ordered recovery of the credited amount along with interest and penalty, stating that the service did not fall under the definition of "input service." On the contrary, the appellate authority allowed the credit. The Tribunal referred to a previous case involving a similar issue and noted that Cenvat credit on commission paid for sale promotion activities is admissible as per Circular No. 943/4/2011-CX and Notification No. 2/2016-CE (NT). The Tribunal held that the notification should be considered declaratory and effective retrospectively, confirming the admissibility of the credit. Based on this settled position and law, the Tribunal found no merits in the impugned orders and allowed the appeals in favor of the appellants, dismissing all the appeals filed by the Revenue.

This judgment highlights the importance of interpreting relevant circulars and notifications to determine the admissibility of cenvat credit on specific services. It underscores the significance of consistency in applying legal provisions across different cases and resolving conflicts in interpretations by various High Courts. The Tribunal's decision to consider the notification declaratory and effective retrospectively provides clarity on the issue, ensuring uniformity in the application of rules related to cenvat credit. The judgment serves as a precedent for future cases involving similar disputes over the eligibility of credit on specific input services, emphasizing the need to consider legislative explanations and notifications in determining the admissibility of such credits.