Home Case Index All Cases Service Tax Service Tax + AT Service Tax - 2023 (8) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (8) TMI 1046 - AT - Service TaxCENVAT Credit - input services or not - services used in the residential colony of the assessee-appellant - nexus with output service or not - period of dispute involved in this case is from April, 2009 to March, 2011 - HELD THAT:- The definition of input service under the un-amended provisions of Rule 2(l) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 (effective up to 31.03.2011) is relevant for consideration of the present dispute - On reading of the statutory provisions, it reveals that in the inclusive part of the definition, the phrase “activities relating to business” is specifically finding place for the purpose of consideration of the services as input service for grant of the benefit of CENVAT Credit to the manufacturer/service provider - It is found that the cost of the disputed services together with the service tax paid thereon towards maintenance and repair of the residential colony situated adjacent to the factory premises had been considered by the appellant for calculation of the cost of production of manufacture of final products and on clearance of the same, they had discharged appropriate duty liability, which has also not been disputed by the Department. The appellant had, in fact, incurred the expenses towards maintenance of the residential colony situated adjacent to factory and such cost has also formed an element of the cost, while preparing the periodic statement of the cost of production, on which appropriate Central Excise duty liability has been discharged. Thus, denial of CENVAT benefit by the authorities below cannot be sustained It is also found that in the appellant’s own case for the earlier period, this Bench in MANIKGARH CEMENT VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, NAGPUR [2017 (9) TMI 776 - CESTAT MUMBAI] has allowed the CENVAT benefit to the appellant on the identical set of facts. There are no merits in the impugned order, insofar as it has upheld denial of the CENVAT benefit to the appellant - the appeal is allowed in favour of the appellant.
|