Appeal on Cenvat Credit for Catering & Manpower Services Upheld

The appeal was made against the Commissioner (Appeals) Order-in-Appeal upholding the demand of Cenvat credit for outdoor catering service and manpower recruitment service. The judge concluded that the assumption of non-mention of "manpower supply" does not affect the right to credit. Regarding the availment of credit on outdoor catering, the judge noted the amendment post-1.4.2011, excluding outdoor catering service from the definition of input service. A prima facie case was found in favor of the Revenue, requiring a pre-deposit for hearing the appeal, with a waiver on the balance amount of duty, interest, and penalty.

---

---

Issues:
1. Confirmation of demand of Cenvat credit for outdoor catering service and manpower recruitment service.
2. Eligibility of service tax credit on the invoice of the manpower recruitment service provider.
3. Availment of credit on outdoor catering service post-amendment from 1.4.2011.

Analysis:

Issue 1:
The appeal was made against the Commissioner (Appeals) Order-in-Appeal upholding the demand of Cenvat credit for outdoor catering service and manpower recruitment service. The stay application was considered, and the department argued that the invoice for manpower recruitment did not clearly indicate "manpower supply." However, the counsel contended that the invoice details clearly related to manpower supply, despite the missing phrase. The judge examined the invoices and concluded that the assumption of non-mention of "manpower supply" does not affect the right to credit.

Issue 2:
Regarding the availment of credit on outdoor catering, the counsel referred to Rule 2(l) of input service and argued for the availability of credit. The counsel also highlighted a subsequent proceeding where the Commissioner (Appeals) allowed the benefit in a similar case. The Departmental Representative (DR) pointed out the amendment post-1.4.2011, excluding outdoor catering service from the definition of input service. The DR justified invoking the extended period and emphasized the lack of disclosure by the appellant regarding availing credit on outdoor catering.

Issue 3:
After hearing both sides and reviewing the records, the judge noted the absence of written submissions from the appellant's advocate. As a result, a prima facie case was found in favor of the Revenue, necessitating a pre-deposit for hearing the appeal. The appellant was directed to deposit the demanded amount within four weeks, with a waiver on the balance amount of duty, interest, and penalty for a specified period or until the appeal's disposal.

This detailed analysis of the judgment addresses the issues of Cenvat credit demand, eligibility of service tax credit, and the post-amendment scenario regarding the availment of credit on outdoor catering services.

---