Input service credit denied for advertisement of another product where no nexus existed with the manufacturer's own final goods.

Service tax paid on advertisement of aerated waters was not eligible as input service credit for manufacture of concentrates because the advertisements promoted a product manufactured by bottlers, not the appellant's own final product. Input service coverage requires a direct or indirect nexus with the manufacture or business of the assessee's products, and advertisement or sales promotion must relate to those products. As the necessary nexus was absent, the Cenvat credit claim failed and denial of credit was upheld.

---

---

Issues: Whether service tax paid on advertisement of aerated waters could be treated as input service for the manufacture of concentrates and qualify for Cenvat credit.

Analysis: The definition of input service covers services used directly or indirectly in or in relation to the manufacture of final products, and also certain inclusive business-related services. However, the advertisement in question was undertaken for aerated waters manufactured by bottlers out of the appellant's concentrates, not for the concentrates manufactured by the appellant. Advertisement or sales promotion must relate to the appellant's own final products; credit cannot be claimed for promotion of a product not manufactured by the appellant. The cited precedents supported the view that advertisement expenses for aerated waters did not form part of the value of the concentrates and did not establish the necessary nexus for input service credit.

Conclusion: The advertisement service was not an input service for the appellant's concentrates, and the denial of Cenvat credit was upheld.

---