TMI Blog2019 (2) TMI 865X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... TD. VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, CUSTOMS AND SERVICE TAX [2017 (3) TMI 16 - CESTAT BANGALORE] - credit allowed. Time limitation - Held that:- The allegation raised in the Show Cause Notice is that Credit is not admissible for the reason that the invoice is addressed to the erstwhile name of the company. An another unit had merged with the present assessee and therefore, there was some difference in the name and address of the assessee. The said reason cannot be a ground for rejection of Credit when there is no dispute with regard to the payment of service tax or availment of services. Credit denied on the ground that the invoice does not show the Registration number of the service provider - Held that:- In the case of M/s. I ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . 2.1 Brief facts are that the assessee is engaged in providing various services like Treasury Management Services, General Accounting Services, Business Information Services, Financial Analytics, Strategic Market Research, etc. With effect from 01.04.2007 another unit, namely, M/s. Office Tiger Database Systems India Pvt. Ltd. registered under the category of Business Auxiliary Services, Business Support Services, Banking and Financial Services, Manpower Recruitment Agency Services and Maintenance and Repair Services merged with the assessee-company pursuant to the Order passed by the Hon ble High Court of Madras dated 23.07.2007. 2.2 During the course of audit of accounts of the assessee-company, it was noticed that they had availed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... C.C.E., Chennai - 2018 (7) T.M.I. 1007 CESTAT Chennai 2. Denial of Credit on Rent-a-Cab 34,95,359/- 36,16,487/- 71,11,846/- 3. Denial of Credit on Outdoor Catering 6,98,851/- 10,21,142/- 17,19,993/- 4. Denial of Credit on Air Travel Agent 72,776/- 82,417/- 1,55,193/- 5. Denial of Credit on Insurance Service 1,35,089/- 1,35,089/- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 3.2 He submitted that the entire period of dispute is prior to 01.04.2011 when the definition of input services had a wide ambit and included the words activities relating to business . The Credit in respect of Health Insurance Service, Rent-a-Cab Service, Outdoor Catering Service and Event Management Service has been disallowed, alleging that these services have no nexus with the output service provided by the assessee. He submitted that these services were availed by the assessee for providing the output service as well as for activities relating to business. 3.3 He submitted that the assessee, being an EOU, has filed refund claim for unutilized Credit for various periods and the Tribunal has considered the issue with ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... able on such amount. He relied upon the decision of the Hon ble Apex Court in the case of Union of India Anor. Vs. M/s. Intercontinental Consultants and Technocrats Pvt. Ltd. 2018 (3) T.M.I. 357 (S.C.). 3.7 Ld. Consultant also drew our attention to the demand of ₹ 13,113/- being the interest demand alleging belated payment of service tax. He submitted that the said demand of interest has been raised on account of the delay in realization of the cheque. The Department has considered the date of realization of the cheque as the date of payment of service tax, which has caused the demand of interest. He relied upon the decision in the case of M/s. Travel Inn India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. C.S.T., Delhi 2015 (6) T.M.I. 626 New Delh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ment of services. 7.3 Further, this amount relates to services like Outdoor Catering, Rent-a-Cab, Air Travel Agent, Insurance, etc., which have been held to be eligible in various decisions passed by the High Courts as well as the Tribunal. Therefore, we are of the view that the disallowance of Credit on the ground that these services have no nexus with the output service or that the invoice address is that of the erstwhile company name, is unjustified. 8. An amount of ₹ 1,82,432/- has been denied alleging that the invoice does not show the Registration number of the service provider. In the case of M/s. Imagination Technologies India Pvt. Ltd. (supra), the said issue has been held in favour of the assessee. Following the same ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
