Home Case Index All Cases Service Tax Service Tax + AT Service Tax - 2021 (2) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2021 (2) TMI 457 - AT - Service TaxCENVAT Credit - input services - credit of the service tax charged on the input service was taken by the Appellant, for purposes of adjusting the same against its output service tax liability on the provision of transportation of gas through pipeline - Whether the Tribunal committed an error in entertaining the ground of the respondent M/s. GSPL on such question of CENVAT credit in a Rectification Application and whether the Tribunal can be stated to have corrected the error apparent on the face of record? - HELD THAT:- The appellants are engaged in the business of transporting gas through pipe line. For the purpose of transporting gas through pipe line it is essential for them to lay pipe lines between their different station. For the purpose of laying pipeline the appellants engage various contractors to procure pipes and completed the activity of laying the pipeline. In this process these contractors get the price of material used by them and all the services provided by them. These contractors pay service tax on the services provided by them to the appellant. These contractors take services from various sub contractor. The issue before us is if the appellants are entitled to take the credit of service tax paid by these contractors directly supplying services to the appellant for the purpose of laying pipeline. The fundamental objection of the revenue is that pipelines are immovable property and not goods and therefore, any service tax paid on such installation cannot be claimed as input credit by the appellant. It is seen that the issue involved in the instant case is squarely covered by the decision of tribunal in the appellant’s own case GUJARAT STATE PETRONET LTD. VERSUS COMMR. OF C. EX. & S.T., AHMEDABAD [2013 (9) TMI 1171 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD]. The said decision was also approved by Hon’ble High Court. The Learned Special Counsel for revenue has argued since the Hon’ble Apex Court has issued notice, the decisions of tribunal and Hon’ble High Court cannot be applied to the instant case - there are no force in this submission as the decision of Hon’ble High Court has not been stayed. The second issue raised by the Learned Special Counsel is that tribunal solely relied on the decision of AP High Court in the case of COMMR. OF C. EX., VISAKHAPATNAM-II VERSUS SAI SAHMITA STORAGES (P) LTD. [2011 (2) TMI 400 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT], and that the decision in the case of Sai Samhita Storages Pvt Ltd relates to ‘inputs’ and not ‘inputs services’ - We do not find any merit in argument of Learned Special Counsel. The decision of tribunal upheld by Hon’ble High Court in Appellant’s own case is comprehensive in all respects. In view of the fact that the decision in the case of Sai Samhita Storages Pvt Ltd was examined by the co-ordinate bench of tribunal and the said decision has been approved by the Hon’ble High Court. There are no merit in the impugned order - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
|