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. The India Cements Ltd. Versus CCE, Salem

2016 (5) TMI 906 - CESTAT CHENNAI

Availment of Cenvat credit - Telephone/mobile phone, courier services and construction and repair services (pertaining to staff quarters) - period involved is April 2011 to December 2012 - Appellant contended that all the services availed by them for olr inside the factory premises, threfore, comes under the definition of input service under Rule 2(l) of the Cenvat Credit Rules 2004 - Held that:- with regard to the credit availed in respect of Telephone/mobile phone and courier services, the jud .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ailed on the Telephone/mobile phone and courier services are allowed. - With respect to the repair and maintenance service pertaining to the appellants staff quarters, it is found that the services are in the nature of welfare activity and from 01.04.2011 onwards the credit availed on such welfare activities are not eligible for the credit under Rule 2(l) of the CCR 2004. Since the credit is held to be eligible on Telephone/mobile phone and courier services, penalty is set aside and with reg .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

as the appellants are manufacturers of cements and are availing Cenvat credit on capital goods, inputs and input services. Appellants were issued with Show cause notices dated 22.08.2013 and 03.02.2014 denying the credit availed in respect of Telephone/mobile phone, courier services and construction and repair services( pertaining to the staff quarters) for the period involving April 2011 to December 2012 for a credit involving ₹ 95,277/- (Telephone/mobile phone and courier service ₹ .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

judicating authority. Hence this appeal is preferred by the appellants. 3. Appellant was represented by Ms. Minchu Mariam Punnoose and Shri S. Muthu Venkataraman, Advocates and the department was represented by Shri R. Chandrasekaran, A.C. (AR). The counsel for the appellants submitted that as per the definition of input service under Rule 2(l) of the Cenvat Credit Rules 2004, any services used by the manufacturer, whether directly or indirectly, in or in relation to the manufacture of final pro .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

raised in the appellants name only. In support of the same, sample invoices were also submitted. Further, with regard to the credit availed on construction and repair service of the appellants staff quarters, it was submitted that the said service was pertaining to the appellants staff quarters, which is also part of the appellants factory and it is the responsibility of the appellant to take proper maintenance of their quarters for the staff welfare. Reliance was placed on the judgement 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

 

 

 

 

 

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