Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2019 (7) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (7) TMI 559 - CESTAT NEW DELHICENVAT Credit - input services or not - house-keeping services - services for member facilitation charges - Services received for representing anti dumping duty etc., - denial on account of nexus - period April, 2013 to September, 2015 - Extended period of limitation - HELD THAT:- Various precedent decisions have held the involved services as cenvatable - Reference can be made to Tribunal decision in the case of M/S. UNIWORTH TEXTILES LTD. VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE. RAIPUR [2013 (1) TMI 616 - SUPREME COURT] laying down that cleaning services as well as legal services and management services are cenvatable - in the case of Commissioner of C. Ex., Delhi-III vs. Maruti Suzuki India Limited [2015 (10) TMI 113 - CESTAT NEW DELHI] housekeeping services have been held to be cenvatable inasmuch as cleanliness is to be maintained for ensuring health surrounding and working condition of the employees. Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Commissioner of C. Ex., Nagpur vs. Ultratech Cement Ltd., [2010 (10) TMI 13 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT] has observed that the scope of definition of input services is very wide and the same covers not only services used directly or indirectly in or in relation to manufacture of final product - Inasmuch as the involved services have been utilised by the appellant for conducting their business, they are required to be held as cenvatable. Extended period of limitation - HELD THAT:- The demand for the period April, 2013 to September, 2015 stands raised by the show cause notice dated 28.01.2016 and major part of the same is barred by limitation. The issue being a bonafide issue of interpretation and the credit having been availed by reflecting the same in the RG-23-A Part-I & Part-II, no malafide can be attributed to the appellant, in the absence of any evidence to the contrary - demand is barred by limitation. Appeal allowed on merits as well as on limitation.
|