TMI Blog2018 (5) TMI 1357X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ure of final products’ - In the case on hand, admittedly, the Revenue has not negatived the plea of the appellant that the service availed of Rent-a-cab service had been used for official purposes by the employees of the appellant, for or during the business. There is also no dispute with regard to the period involved in the present case that it was prior to 01.04.2011. The Revenue has lost sight of the fact that the said service was provided by the appellant to its workers to reach the factory premises in time which has a direct bearing on the manufacturing activity/production which, otherwise, the employees would have claimed conveyance allowance - the appellant is eligible to avail Cenvat credit of rent-a-cab service up to 01.04.2011. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the order of the adjudicating authority. Hence this appeal by the tax-payer. 2. On behalf of the appellants, Ld. Counsel, Shri G. Vijayabalan submitted that disallowance of Cenvat credit relates to Rent-a-cab service availed prior to 01.04.2011 and during this period input service included activities relating to business . It is only from 01.04.2011, this was deleted from the definition of input service. Both the authorities below erred in holding that Rent-a-cab service does not merit coverage under the definition of Rule 2 (l) of the CCR, 2004 prior to or after 01.04.2011, which is contrary to the Board s clarification in Circular No. 943/04/2011-Cx dated 29.04.2011, specifically given to the service ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pport from the findings of the authorities below and contended that the impugned order is to be upheld. 4. Heard both sides and carefully considered the documents and case law relied on during the arguments. 5.1 The main ground raised is that whether the appellants are eligible for Cenvat credit on Rent-a-Cab service. It is the case of the appellant that they all along pleaded right from their reply to the SCN, that Rent-a-cab service has been used by them for official purposes only and that too it was prior to 01.04.2011. For the subsequent period ie., from 01.04.2011 to 31.12.2011 they have reversed the credit that was availed vide RG 23 A Part 2 Sl. No. 04 dated 10.01.2012 and also paid interest. It was further pleaded that the st ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... force comes on time at the work place, the employers have taken this measure which has a direct bearing on the manufacturing activity. At any rate it is an activity relating to business. 5.3 The above view has been reiterated or followed in most of the judgments/orders referred during hearing. The Revenue has denied the benefit without indicating as to how Rent-a-cab service has no nexus, directly or indirectly, with the manufacturing activity of the appellant. No doubt, the Hon ble Supreme court in the case of M/s. Maruti Suzuki Ltd. Vs. CCE, Delhi reported in 2009 (240) ELT 641 (S.C) has held that crucial requirement for availment of input credit of all goods is used in or in relation to the manufacture of final products . In the cas ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
