Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2017 (5) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (5) TMI 621 - CESTAT AHMEDABADCENVAT credit - Banking and Other Financial Services - Legal Consultancy Services - commission towards foreign remittance - scope of the definition of Input Service as laid down u/r 2(l) of CCR, 2004 - Held that: - the Service Tax paid on commissions towards foreign remittance is eligible to Cenvat Credit in view of the judgment of this Tribunal in the case of Meghmani Dyes & Intermediates [2014 (1) TMI 558 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD], where it was held that definition covers not only services used directly or indirectly in or in relation to manufacture of final products but also various services used in relation to business of manufacture whether prior to manufacture or after manufacture. Needless to say banking charges are paid in relation to purchase of raw materials and sale of finished goods and therefore such services is definitely relatable to the manufacture - credit allowed. Banking and Financial Service - Held that: - in all the bills Service Tax was paid on the Banking Commission charges in relation to foreign remittance and nowhere the charges in the said bills were collected relating to forward contract entered into between the appellant and the Bank. In these circumstances, the Service Tax paid on Commission Charge on foreign remittance is eligible to Cenvat Credit under the category of Banking and Forward Services. With regard to Cenvat Credit availed on Legal Service, the issue is more of less covered by the Judgment of Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the case of CCE vs HCL Technologies Ltd [2014 (11) TMI 663 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT], where it was held that the service was governed by the definition of "input service" - credit allowed. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
|