Home Case Index All Cases Service Tax Service Tax + AT Service Tax - 2019 (2) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (2) TMI 573 - AT - Service TaxCENVAT Credit - non-payment of service tax - Business auxiliary services - denial of credit on various services on the ground of nexus - Held that:- The credit cannot be denied to the appellant as all these services has been availed by the appellant in the course of their business of manufacturing in terms of the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High court in the case of Ultratech Cement Ltd. [2010 (10) TMI 13 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT] wherein it was held hat any service availed by the assessee during the course of their business of manufacturing, the assessee is entitled to avail credit - credit allowed. CENVAT credit - denial on various services on the ground that the said services have been availed by the appellant outside their unit - Held that:- There is no provision in the Cenvat Credit Rules to deny credit if any service is availed outside the business premises. In fact, the assessee can avail the service outside the factory premises during the course of their business of manufacturing. Admittedly, the said services have been received by the assessee during the course of their business of manufacturing, therefore, they are entitled to avail credit on these services - credit allowed. Business Auxiliary services - commission recovered from insurance companies and banks - period October, 2003 to March, 2008 - Held that:- Similar issue came up before this Tribunal in the case of Ashok Auto Sales Ltd. [2013 (7) TMI 965 - ITAT AGRA], wherein the assessee was engaged in the same activity of providing table space, carrying out minimal paper work etc. for the banks and for the same, consideration was received from the bank. In the said case, this Tribunal held that the assessee was not providing Business Auxiliary services to the bank and hence, no service tax is leviable. The service tax cannot be demanded from the appellant on the value of spare parts/consumables utilized during the course of provision of services in the capacity of Authorized Service Station. Business Auxiliary services - Held that:- In the present case, the appellant is acting on principal to principal basis and appellant buys vehicle from M/s.TKML subsequently sale them in the market, therefore, the appellant is getting incentive on account of discounts for excess sale effected by the appellant. Such amount of discount which cannot be held Business Auxiliary Service in terms of Section 65 (19) of the Finance Act, 1994 as the appellant is not promoting or marketing or selling the goods on behalf of their client. In fact, the appellant is marketing their own goods as the appellant is the owner of the goods in question - demand of service on this ground is not sustainable against the appellant. Penalty - Held that:- The credit cannot be denied to the appellant and no service tax can be demanded from the appellant, therefore, no penalty is imposable on the appellant. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
|