2017 (8) TMI 792 - AT - Service Tax

Appellant Wins Partial Refund Appeals on Input Services under CENVAT Credit Rules

M/s. C-Cubed Solutions Private Limited Versus Commissioner of Service Tax Bangalore Service Tax-I

The Tribunal partially allowed the appellant's appeals against the denial of refund on specific input services under CENVAT Credit Rules. Refunds were ... 100% EOU - refund of unutilised CENVAT credit - various input services - furniture are hired by the appellant for the employees to use at the office premises - Held that: - The furniture are hired by the appellant for the employees to use at the office premises while working on the computers and the definition of ‘input service' under Rule 2(l) of CCR, 2004 clearly includes furniture hire as activity relating to business - refund allowed. Refund - input services - rent - repair and maintenance services - Held that: - this Tribunal in the appellant's own case, has allowed the refund of CENVAT credit on rent, repair and maintenance and furniture hiring in the final orders - refund allowed. Appeals of the appellant except the refund on rates and taxes in respect of two appeals viz., ST/20215 & 21219/2015 are allowed - appeal allowed - decided partly in favor of appellant. Issues Involved:Appeal against refund denial on certain input services under CENVAT Credit Rules.Analysis:The appellant, a subsidiary providing IT services, filed appeals against the denial of refund on specific input services by the Commissioner. The appellant sought refund under CENVAT Credit Rules for service tax paid on input services related to their taxable service of 'Online Data Retrieval or Access.' The details of the refunds claimed and rejected were presented in a tabular form for various periods. The Commissioner allowed refunds on certain input services but rejected them on Rent, Repairs and Maintenance, Furniture Hiring, and Rates and Taxes.The appellant contended that the impugned orders were not sustainable as the Commissioner misconstrued the definition of 'input service' under Rule 2(1) of CCR. They argued that furniture hiring for employees working on computers falls within the definition of 'input service' and referenced a Tribunal order supporting their claim. Regarding rent, it was argued that rent for office premises used for commercial activities qualifies as an 'input service.' The maintenance of computers by system admin personnel was claimed to be an essential input service for business activities. The appellant also defended rates and taxes as providing business opportunities for export services.The Tribunal had previously allowed refunds on rent, repair and maintenance, and furniture hiring in the appellant's case. In the current judgment, the Judicial Member partially allowed the appeals, except for rates and taxes in two specific appeals. The decision was based on the appellant's arguments and the Tribunal's past rulings. The appeals were partially allowed with consequential relief granted, except for rates and taxes in two specific appeals.In conclusion, the judgment addressed the appellant's contentions regarding the definition of 'input service' and previous Tribunal rulings. The decision to partially allow the appeals was based on the arguments presented and past precedents, providing relief to the appellant on most input services except rates and taxes in two specific appeals.