Subscription   Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Articles Highlights TMI Notes SMS News Newsletters Calendar Imp. Links Database Experts Contact us More....
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

M/s Paramount Communication Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Jaipur-I

2016 (1) TMI 1056 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

Rectification of mistake - Eligibility for Cenvat Credit on insurance services and taxi services provided for staff and employees and also services of repair and maintenance of vehicle - Held that:- There was no dispute whether the services were availed for staff and employees. Needless to say that no evidence has to be adduced for facts which are not in dispute. It apparently appears that the Tribunal has erred in recording a finding of fact. Rule 2 (l) does not say that the services availed in .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

and circumstances of each case. The error pointed out by the appellants is manifest on the face of records and for the same, the decision relied by the DR is not applicable to the facts herein. The Tribunal being the ultimate fact finding forum, a patent error on finding of fact which has formed the basis of the decision in the appeal does call for rectification. It is also pointed out that the issue of limitation though raised was not considered at all.The ROM application is allowed accordingl .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

the appeal is whether the appellant is eligible for Cenvat Credit on insurance services and taxi services provided for staff and employees and also services of repair and maintenance of vehicle. The Tribunal by its' Final Order dated 9.4.2014 dismissed the appeal holding that in the absence of evidence to show that the services are provided for staff/employees under statutory obligation, it cannot be presumed that these facilities are provided to workers in terms of law. According to the app .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Ld. Counsel for the appellant submits that the service tax paid on the services availed from insurance company and also the transporter was denied as CENVAT credit. There is no evidence on record to show that these services were meant for workers while discharging the statutory obligation if any. Nothing could be explained as whether premium paid and transport facilities provided were to discharge any statutory obligation. In the absence of evidences, there cannot be presumption that the facilit .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

rival submissions. 5. The impugned Final Order shows that the claim for Cenvat credit was dismissed for the reason that there is no evidence to establish that these services were provided to workers under statutory obligation. The Tribunal has entered a finding of fact that evidence is absent as to whether these services were availed for staff/employees under statutory obligation. On perusal of records, the learned Counsel for appellants is correct in the submissions made in this regard. The au .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ding shows that Rule 2(1) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 sought to provide eligibility to cenvat credit of the taxes paid for only those services, which have correlation or nexus with the manufacture and clearances of the goods. The insurance of staff & employees, taxi charges and services taken from service station for maintenance of vehicles as noted above, were taken to perform a statutory obligation to pay compensation to employees and thus, they were in the nature of employee welfare .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

y integral or connected with the principal activity of manufacture." In Page 7 of the Order-in-Appeal it is held as under:- "In view of the above, I hold that the appellant was not entitled to avail the Cenvat credit of service tax paid on insurance of staff/employee, taxi charges and repair/maintenance of vehicles in terms of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 as the said service is not input service as defined under 2 (1) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. Thus from the above, it is clear that .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

station for maintenance of vehicles etc. (as detailed in Annexure-"A" which appears to not admissible to them. It appears that insurance of staff & employees, taxi charges and services taken from service station for maintenance of vehicles etc. cannot be considered as eligible input service under Rule 2 (I) (ii) of the Cenvat Credit Rules-2004. Thus, they appears to have wrongly availed Cenvat Credit ₹ 69,188/- (Service Tax ₹ 66,870/- + Edu. Cess ₹ 1,652/- + S. & .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

what is new what is new
  ↓     bird's eye view     ↓  


|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version