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 Pyrotech Workspace Solutions Pvt. Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Jaipur-II

2016 (3) TMI 1041 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

Admissibility of Cenvat credit on industrial construction service as the said service had no nexus with manufacture and clearance of excisable goods - Held that:- It has been admitted that the said input service is used for providing output services. Therefore, the objection is on utilization of such credit as available on input service for payment of Central Excise duty on industrial furniture. Thus find the reasoning by the lower Authorities is devoid of any legal merit. The eligibility of cre .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

redit availed on input services. Hence, the order of the lower Authority disallowing the Cenvat credit on input service is not legally sustainable. It is seen that the impugned order (para 11) examines the scope of 'input service'. The learned Commissioner (Appeals) observed that credit of service tax on input service is admissible only on those services which have connection or nexus with the manufacture and clearance of goods and includes services used in relation to activities relating to bus .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

2016-SM(BR) - Dated:- 20-1-2016 - B. Ravichandran, Member (T) For the Appellant : Shri Bipin Garg, Adv. For the Respondent : Shri M R Sharma, AR, (DR) ORDER Per B. Ravichandran This is an appeal against order dated 19/12/2013 of Commissioner (Appeals-II), Jaipur. The appellants are engaged in the manufacture of industrial furniture liable to Central Excise Duty. They are also engaged in providing various taxable services like maintenance and repair, commissioning and installation etc. They have .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

isallowed a credit of ₹ 10,55,318/- and imposed equal penalty on the appellants. On appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals) vide his impugned order upheld the original order and rejected the appeal. Aggrieved by this, the present appeal is preferred by the appellant. 2. The learned Counsel for the appellant submitted (i) the appellants are manufacturing furniture at their factory and the said furniture are required to be erected/ installed at different locations; in some cases such installation .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

tilization of such credit either for payment of service tax or excise duty. There is no requirement that credit taken on input services with reference to output services cannot be utilized for payment of Central Excise duty, if the manufacturer and the service provider is one and the same ; (c) the lower authorities have completely misapplied the facts to arrive at the erroneous conclusion. The findings in para 11 of the impugned order has no support in law. The assertion by the learned Commissi .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

input services which was used for providing output service cannot be utilized for payment of Central Excise duty is unsustainable in terms of the provisions of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. The Rules do not provide for any one to one co-relation between credit legally availed and its utilization. 3. The learned AR reiterated the findings of the lower Authorities and submitted that the credit on commercial construction service is not available to the appellant for the manufacture of industrial furni .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ht to be denied on the ground that such credit is not available in terms of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. In fact, it has been admitted that the said input service is used for providing output services. Therefore, the objection is on utilization of such credit as available on input service for payment of Central Excise duty on industrial furniture. I find the reasoning by the lower Authorities is devoid of any legal merit. The eligibility of credit on the input service has not been contested. Once .....

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