TMI Blog2022 (8) TMI 1391X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... held that the dredging service received by the appellant for construction of navigation channel is an input service and the credit was allowed. From the above judgment, it is seen that the entire fact and the legal position of the present case is exactly same as was in the above cited decision of this tribunal. The only difference is, in the present case the show cause notice are periodical whereas, the allegation and contents of the show cause notice are common. As regards submission of the appellant that the cost of service was borne by the appellant only hence credit is available to them, it is found that it is undisputed fact that the entire cost charged by the service provider to the appellant only and the same was expenditure ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ments:- ADANI PORDER SPECIAL ECONOMIC ZONE LTD.- 2016 (42) STR 1010 (Tri.-Ahmedabad) SANGHI INDUSTRIES- 2020-TIOL-328-CESTAT-AHM ULTRATECH CEMENT- 2021-TIOL-161-CESTAT-AHM SAURASHTRA CEMENT LTD.- 2018-TIOL-2749-CESTAT-AHM 2.1 He further submits that the entire expense for dredging and the service tax thereon has been borne by the appellant M/s. EBTL. In terms of the permission granted to EBTL, it is debarred by GMB from recovering any charges for usage of such channels from others and the same forms a part of the output services, being rendered to ESTL. He placed reliance on the judgments in the case of Coca Cola India Pvt. V/s. Commissioner of Central Excise, Pune-III- 2009 (15) STR 657 (Tri.-Mum.) and the Hon ble ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d. The relevant part of this tribunal decision is extracted below:- 4.1 As regard the issue that whether the dredging services has nexus with the output service namely port service and cargo handling service, we find that dredging service availed by the appellant is integral to providing output services for ships to come at the appellant s jetty, without availing the dredging service the appellant could not be able to provide the output service of cargo handling. The dredging service was availed exclusively for the purpose of making channel at port Magdalla which was very shallow and as a consequence of mother vessels which required a higher deep draft could not have reached the said port. As per the agreement with Essar Steel Ltd the a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he said output service. Therefore, any service is availed in relation to the operation of port or construction of port is indeed the input service. Accordingly, the assessee is entitled for cenvat credit in respect of such input service i.e. dredging service used for providing output service i.e. Port Service. 4.4 In the present case also even though the appellant was allowed to construct the port/jetty in particular navigation channel by GMB but the fact remains that the operation of the port is solely carried out by the appellant. It is a settled position that for availing the cenvat credit it is not necessary that the location from where the output service is provided should be owned by the service provider. As long the service is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... premises on lease which is owned by the leasor. However, irrespective of services received related to such premises or not but the credit cannot be denied on the service received by the service provider in respect of the leased premises for a simple reason such that such leased premises is used by the service provider for providing the output service. The only condition is that in respect of input service the relationship between the service provider and input service recipient is that of service provider and the service recipient. The payment of any service including the service tax is charged by the service provider and the same is borne by the input service recipient. In the present case also as regard the service provision of dredging s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e to our above finding we further find that, it is the theoretical terms in the agreement with Gujarat Maritime Board that the said navigation channel can be used by other users also. However, as submitted by the appellant and the fact on record the navigation channel was dredged only upto the location of the appellant s jetty. Therefore, looking to the factual location of the jetty no other users can pass through that channel because the channel has no free through way, for this reason the said navigation channel has the dead end at one side of the jetty. In this position even though there is a condition in the agreement with GMB to allow the navigation channel to others but practically the said channel cannot be used by others. Moreover, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
