TMI Blog2023 (5) TMI 891X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ions relied upon by the Ld. Advocate for the appellant. Therefore, as per the settled principal of law, denial of Cenvat Credit on this ground also is not sustainable. As the appeal in respect of the first three show cause notices have been allowed, these proceedings which are sequel to the earlier proceedings need also to be considered in the light of the above order and allowed. Appeal allowed. - Service Tax Appeal No. 87620 of 2019 - FINAL ORDER NO. A/85028/2023 - Dated:- 12-1-2023 - HON BLE MR. SANJIV SRIVASTAVA , MEMBER ( TECHNICAL ) Shri Somesh Jain , Advocate , for the Appellant Shri Nitin Ranjan , Deputy Commissioner , Authorised Representative for the Respondent ORDER This appeal is directed against Order-in-Appeal No. PVNS/148/Appeals-II/ME/2019 dated 04.06.2019 passed by the Commissioner of Central Tax CGST (Appeals), Mumbai-II. By the impugned order, Commissioner (Appeals) has partly modified the order of the original authority to the extent of setting aside the penalty imposed. 1.2 The adjudicating authority has by his order held as follows:- ORDER 21(i) I disallow the Cenvat Credit of Rs.25,25,269/- (Rupees Twenty Fiv ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2013 2012-13 Asst. Commissioner ST-V/DnX/SCNUltratech/ 15/2015 10.03.2015 2013-14 Addl. Commissioner 32/JC/Dn.X/2015-16 29.02.2015 2014-15 Joint Commissioner Subsequently one more show cause notice dated 22.01.2018 was issued to the appellant for the period 2015-16 to 2017-18 (Upto June 2017) asking them to show cause as to why:- (i) Cenvat Credit amounting to Rs.25,25,269/- (Rupees Twenty Five Lakhs Twenty Five Thousand Sixty Nine wrongly availed and distributed by them as detailed in Para (3) above, to various manufacturing units would not be disallowed and recovered from them under Rule 14 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 read with the provisions of Finance Act, 1994; (ii) Interest should not be demanded recovered from them under Rule 14 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 read with Section 75 of Finance Act, 1994; (iii) Penalty should not be imposed upon them under Section 76 and 77 of the Finance Act, 1994, read with Rule 15(1) of the Cenvat Credit Rules ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mean that all the services availed by the provider of output service would be available for Cenvat credit for output service provider. All services which constitute activities related to business need not have a nexus with output service provided and would not qualify to become input Service. Moreover, the word activities related to business stands deleted. Hence, while deciding the eligibility, one will have to see the nexus between the input service and output service and whether they are used in output services provided. Various appellate authorities, Hon'ble High Courts and Apex Court also have discussed the relevancy and eligibility of Cenvat credit. The definition of input services cannot be stretched to such an extent that it becomes practically illogical. If such an extended meaning is given to the said definition so as to include all the activities of the appellants, whether or not relatable to his business, the definition would lose its meaning, intended to be given by the legislation. I find that the exclusion clause, which was absent earlier, inserted vide Notification No. 28/2012-CE (NT) dated 20.06.2012 with effective from 01.07.2012 in Rule 2(1) of the Cenvat Cr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... en used by the employees who attend training programmes organized by the appellants. Hence, these are used in relation to manufacture of final products. I find that the appellant in order to avail credit of the services, they have to establish that the service rendered was actually used in or in relation directly or indirectly in providing the output service in terms of Rules 2 (1) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. It is explicable that if the impugned service was used by functionaries/officials/employees of the company for commutation for providing output service, there must be some documentary evidence to that effect. I find that the appellant has submitted illustrative invoices from which it is not forthcoming that such expenses were not incurred by employees for personal use. Since they failed to produce the relevant documentary evidences which can substantiate the fact that these services were actually used for providing their output service and these services were having nexus with the output services provided by them, no relief can be extended to the appellant. 7.2 In respect of the input services, mentioned above, it is observed that in terms of sub-rule(5) and sub-rule(6 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ub Association, Rent-a-cab, Event Management and Car Insurance are not confirming to the definition of input service provided under Rule 2 (l) ibid. Accordingly, the provisions of Rule 14 ibid read with Section 73 ibid was invoked by the department for recovery of the alleged amount of Cenvat Credit availed by the appellant. 7. The provisions for recovery of Cenvat Credit wrongly taken by the assessee are contained in Rule 14 ibid. The said statutory provision mandates that irregularly availed or utilized Cenvat Credit can be recovered from the manufacturer or the provider of output service. In this case, the corporate office of the appellant is registered with the service tax department as an Input Service Distributor and distributed the Cenvat Credit in respect of service tax paid on the input services among its manufacturing units. It is not the case of the department that the appellant is either avails or utilizes the Cenvat Credit of service tax paid on the input services. Input Service Distributor neither provides any service nor engages in manufacture of excisable goods. Thus, the question of payment of service tax or Central Excise duty on the taxable services or the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
