TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Appellate authority allows Cenvat credit for various services beyond manufacturing.</h1> <h3>COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX Versus M/s SWATI INDUSTRIES</h3> The appellate authority affirmed the Commissioner (Appeals)'s decision, allowing Cenvat credit for services like overseas commission, Customs House ... Availment of CENVAT Credit - Overseas commission (BAS), Customs House Agents and Terminal Handling Services - Equivalent penalty under Rule 15 of the Cenvat credit Rules, 2004 read with Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944 - Held that:- Service tax paid on overseas commission is available to the assessee as Cenvat credit. Similarly, in case of availability of Cenvat credit paid on the Customs House Agents and Shipping Lines, allowed the same by following the Tribunal in the case of M/s. Vidyut Metallies Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CCE, Mumbai - [2012 (6) TMI 486 - CESTAT, MUMBAI] as also the Tribunal decision in the case of M/s. Steel Strips Wheels Ltd. Vs. CCE, Chandigarh-II - [2013 (3) TMI 399 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI] - Decided against Revenue. Issues:Interpretation of 'Input Service' for Cenvat credit eligibility.Analysis:The case involved a dispute regarding the eligibility of Cenvat credit amounting to Rs.9,75,663/- claimed by the appellant for service tax paid on 'Overseas commission (BAS), Customs House Agents, and Terminal Handling Services' during the period April 2004 to December 2008. The adjudicating authority held that these services did not qualify as input services under Rule 2(1) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, as they were not directly related to the place of removal of goods from the factory. Consequently, the authority ordered the recovery of the Cenvat credit amount along with interest and imposed a penalty under Rule 15 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, read with Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944.Upon appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals) considered the interpretation of 'Input Service' and noted that this definition should not be limited to manufacturing activities alone but should be analyzed based on the business requirements. The Commissioner relied on various court decisions, including the Tribunal's decision in the case of CCE, Ludhiana Vs. Ambika Overseas, where it was held that service tax paid on overseas commission is eligible for Cenvat credit. Additionally, the Commissioner allowed the Cenvat credit for Customs House Agents and Shipping Lines based on precedents like the Tribunal's decision in the case of M/s. Vidyut Metallies Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CCE, Mumbai and M/s. Steel Strips Wheels Ltd. Vs. CCE, Chandigarh-II.The appellate authority found no fault in the Commissioner (Appeals)'s order, stating that the issues raised by the Revenue were already settled through various Tribunal decisions and High Court rulings. Consequently, the appeal was rejected, affirming the decision in favor of the respondent.This judgment clarifies the broader interpretation of 'Input Service' beyond manufacturing activities and emphasizes considering business requirements for Cenvat credit eligibility. It also underscores the importance of precedent in determining the applicability of Cenvat credit for specific services, as established through previous court decisions and Tribunal rulings.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
