TMI Blog2015 (3) TMI 560X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d, that atleast in factories having employees more than 250, should provide, that does not mean that the service was not required for any industrial service or organization having less than 250 workers. Even the employees of a smaller organization having less than 250 workers will also be hungry and required to be provided with canteen facility for the employees. Therefore, I hold that the ruling in the case of IFB Factories Ltd. (2013 (1) TMI 503 - CESTAT BANGALORE) per incuriam, as the provisions of Factories Act, have been wrongly interpreted, with respect to the provisions of input service. In view of my findings, I hold that the Respondent-assessee is entitled to Cenvat Credit in respect of outdoor catering service - Decided against Re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... no relationship with the output services rendered. Being aggrieved, the appellant had preferred appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals), who vide the impugned order-in-appeal dt. 19.2.2013 relying on the ruling of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CCE, Nagpur vs. Ultratech Cement Ltd. - 2010 (20) S.T.R. 577 and also on the ruling in the case of M/s Hindustan Coca Cola Beverages Pvt. Ltd. vs. CCE, Nashik Appeal No. E/89199/2013 E/85728/2014 allowed the appeal, wherein the CBEC Circular no. 943/4/2011-CX dated 29 th April 2011 allowing the CENVAT credit was referred to. Further, the Commissioner (Appeals) have held that the revenue has failed to bring anything on record to show that the outdoor catering service has not been ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ption Ser. (P) Ltd. vs. CST, Bangalore 2011(201)STR 430 (Tri-Bang) wherein the Single Member Bench have held that employees of the assessee are its precious input in providing its output services and without the availabilty of employees, there cannot be any manufacturer or output service. Accordingly, relying on the Larger Bench ruling of this Tribunal in the case of CCE vs. GTC Industries Ltd. 2008 (12) S.T.R. 468 (Tri. - LB) it was held that, wherein employment of outdoor caterer for providing catering services was held to be essential input service in relation to business and accordingly held eligible. He further relies on the ruling of this Tribunal in the case of M/s Hindustan Coca Cola Beverages Ltd. vs. CCE, Nashik vide Order no. A/1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ltra Tech Cement Ltd. that outdoor catering service is allowable only in the case of more than 250 workers, as it was mandatorily required under the provisions of the Factories Act, 1948 for providing canteen services. It shows that the legislation appreciates the need of canteen service for the workers at the place of work. Only to avoid the hardship for an essential need, the legislation have provided, that atleast in factories having employees more than 250, should provide, that does not mean that the service was not required for any industrial service or organization having less than 250 workers. Even the employees of a smaller organization having less than 250 workers will also be hungry and required to be provided with canteen facilit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
