Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2015 (10) TMI 2414

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... hat:- No factual basis found for CCE(A) to have concluded that on account of bills for providing services having been raised on German Embassy and payments having been made by German Embassy, nature of services rendered was an exempted service - It was incumbent on Revenue to have placed some material on record to prove that services were provided not to German Air Force but to German Embassy. Eligibility of credit on Capital Goods - Chassis of motor vehicles were converted into toilet carts and water carts and were not registered - Used only for cargo handling services and not on roads – Same eligible to be capital goods – credit allowed. Decided against the Revenue. - CEAC 38/2015 & CM APPL 17506/2015 - - - Dated:- 1-9-2015 - Dr. S .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... services as required by Rule 6(2) read with Rule 6(3) (c) of Cenvat Credit Rules 2004 (CC Rules). It was alleged that the Respondent had availed Cenvat credit in excess of the permissible limit of 20% of the service tax payable on the output services. 3. The second aspect concerns availing by the Respondent of Cenvat credit of the Central Excise Duty paid on the Tata Chassis/motor vehicle in the sum of ₹ 4,70,490 during October 2007 to March 2008. The allegation here is that as per the definition of capital goods under Rule 2(a)(A) of the CC Rules, the motor vehicle chassis do not qualify capital goods in relation to airport services‟. Since Rule 2(a) (B) of the CC Rules stipulates that only those motor vehicles registered i .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... gh order dated 23rd June 2011 passed by the Joint Commissioner, Service Tax as well as order in appeal dated 29th May 2013 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals) [ CCE(A)‟] both of whom have concurrently affirmed the demand as raised in the SCN. 8. In relation to the first issue concerning the nature of services provided by the Respondent the finding returned by the CCE (A) is that the Respondent had raised bills for services rendered to the German Embassy and payments were also made for such bills by the German Embassy and therefore, undoubtedly the ground handling services at the airports were provided by the appellants to the German Embassy and the services so provided to the German Embassy were exempted from pa .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... (a) of the FA which stated that the sub-clause which provides the most specific description shall be preferred to the sub-clauses providing a more general description would not apply to any service when the same is rendered wholly within the airport or civil enclave. Section 65(105) (zr) defines a taxable service as including a service rendered to any person, by a cargo handling agency in relation to cargo handling services. This is a more specific entry than Section 65(105) (zm) FA which seeks to generally apply to all services provided in an airport. Unless the context otherwise requires, the specific definition of a taxable service should be preferred over a general description. In other words, with there being nothing to show that d .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ted for use on roads. It was clarified that a motor vehicle would not include a vehicle running upon fixed rails or a vehicle of a special type adapted for use only in a factory or in any other enclosed premises . 15. As pointed out by the CESTAT in the impugned order, the chassis of the motor vehicles were converted into toilet carts and water carts and were not registered under Motors Vehicle Act 1988. They were used only for the cargo handling services and not on roads. In these circumstances, the finding that they were capital goods within the meaning of Rule 2 (a) (A) of the CC Rules 2004 cannot be said to suffer from any legal infirmity. 16. Consequently, the Court finds no reason whatsoever to interfere with the impugned order .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates