2017 (4) TMI 587 - AT - Service Tax

CESTAT Chennai: Partial appeal success, Cenvat credit granted for specific expenses. Construction, miscellaneous work denied.

Lakshmi Vilas Bank Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Trichy

The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT CHENNAI, in the case, partially allowed the appeal. It granted Cenvat credit for specific amounts due to technical defects, ... CENVAT credit - denial on account of change of addresses - Held that: - There is no enquiry conducted to find out whether the amounts related to the appellant are not. In absence of any contra finding, there should not be denial of the Cenvat credit just for a technical defect - credit allowed. Construction of cabin chair, etc., bill for miscellaneous work in MD quarters, bill for miscellaneous work in apartment and use of telephone - Held that: - There is no justification nor any relevancy or integral connection brought out by appellant on the grounds of appeal to establish that those were essential input services for providing output service - credit denied. Construction of toilet for staff quarter - Held that: - the basic amenities for the employees have been provided like the obligation under Factories Act - credit allowed. Services of pest control - Held that: - it is essential requirement to carry on business to protect record for verification of the public authorities. Therefore, denial of Cenvat credit to such services shall be contrary to public interest - credit allowed. Appeal partly allowed - decided partly in favor of appellant. Issues:1. Rejection of Cenvat credit on the basis of lack of integral connection between claim and services provided.2. Denial of Cenvat credit due to technical defect of change of addresses.3. Justification for denying Cenvat credit related to construction and miscellaneous work bills.4. Allowance of Cenvat credit for construction of staff quarter toilet.5. Allowance of Cenvat credit for pest control services.Analysis:The judgment by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT CHENNAI, delivered by Shri D.N. Panda, Member (J), addressed several key issues. Firstly, it was noted that the appellate authority rejected the appellant's appeal due to a lack of integral connection between the claim and services provided by the appellant. The tribunal found that the denial of Cenvat credit solely on this basis was not justified. The appellant was granted Cenvat credit of specific amounts related to a technical defect of change of addresses, as no enquiry was conducted to ascertain the connection between the amounts and the appellant.Regarding the Cenvat credit related to construction expenses and bills for miscellaneous work, the tribunal upheld the denial of credit as the appellant failed to establish the essentiality of these expenses as input services for providing output services. However, the tribunal allowed the Cenvat credit for the construction of a staff quarter toilet, considering it as a basic amenity for employees, in compliance with the Factories Act.Furthermore, the judgment addressed the issue of Cenvat credit for pest control services. The tribunal recognized pest control as an essential requirement for business operations to protect records for verification by public authorities. Consequently, the denial of Cenvat credit for pest control services was deemed contrary to public interest, and the appellant was allowed the Cenvat credit for these services.In conclusion, the appeal was partly allowed by the tribunal, granting Cenvat credit for specific amounts related to technical defects, construction of staff quarter toilet, and pest control services, while upholding the denial of credit for other expenses due to lack of essential connection with providing output services.