Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India. Com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Case Laws Manuals Short Notes Articles SMS News Highlights
        Home        
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

M/s Nhava Sheva International Container Terminal Pvt. Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Raigad

2017 (4) TMI 805 - CESTAT MUMBAI

CENVAT credit - Outdoor Catering Services - Manpower Supply for Garden Maintenance Services - Maintenance and Repair Service of Sewage Treatment Plant - Held that: - the appellants had agreed to reverse the CENVAT Credit in so far as it pertains to the amount collected from the employees in respect of the Outdoor Catering Services - the credit for the period prior to 1.4.2011 is allowed to the extent, the incidence of such services is borne by the appellant not recovered from anybody else - so f .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

- Held that: - Interest was required to be paid on credit taken or utilized wrongly. Interest liability will accordingly be modified by original adjudicating authority as per the prevailing provisions of law. - Penalty - Held that: - it is a fit case for invocation of Section 80 of the Finance Act, 1994 and, therefore, penalty u/r 15 of the CCR, which in turn is penalty in terms of Section 76 or 78 of the FA, 1994, is set aside. - Appeal allowed - decided partly in favor of appellant. - .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

uthorities, the appellants are before Tribunal. 2. Learned Counsel for the appellants argued that they are providing Outdoor Catering Services as the Dock Workers (Safety Health and Welfare) Regulations, 2006 provides to maintain canteen facility. He, however, submitted that so far as it relates to the amount recovered from the employees, they are ready to reverse the CENVAT Credit for the period prior to 1.4.2011. He pointed out that even Commissioner (Appeals) has agreed to this proposition. H .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

decisions: - (a) Gateway Terminal - 2015 (39) STR 1027 (Tri-Mum) (b) Hindustan Coca Cola Beverages - 2015 (38) STR 129 (c) Hindustan Coca Cola Beverages - 2015-TIOL-3003-CESTAT-DEL. 2.2 He further argued that in respect of certain services which were received prior to 1.4.2011, the payment was made after 1.4.2011. He argued that in respect of such credit, the provisions prior to 1.4.2011 should be applied. For this proposition, he relied on the following decision and Board s Circular: - (a) Hin .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

nted consent to operate the Port at JNPT on the condition that they will operate sewerage treatment plant as prescribed under Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974. He pointed out that the Maharashtra Pollution & Control Board requires that a portion of water discharge from sewage treatment plant should be used for plantation in the port premises. He argued that as the consequence they are required to maintain the garden as part of the statutory requirements under environment .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

iled the credit, the same should have been utilized and interest should not have been charged on the said credit. 3. Learned AR relied on the impugned order. 4. I have gone through the rival submissions. I find that the appellants had agreed to reverse the CENVAT Credit in so far as it pertains to the amount collected from the employees in respect of the Outdoor Catering Services. For the rest, the appellants have relied on the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Ultratech Cement Ltd. (supra .....

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 been argued that the catering services provided by them is not primarily for the personal consumption, but it is a statutory requirement, the appellants have relied on the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Hindustan Coca Cola & Beverages -2015 (38) STR 129. In the said case, the incidence of Outdoor Catering was entirely borne by the appellant unlike in the present case, the principles of entitlement of the credit would remain the same as was for the period prior to 1.4.2011. Thus, .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Discussion Forum
what is new what is new
 


Share:            

|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members ||

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

Go to Mobile Version