Tribunal grants Cenvat credit for service tax on rented premises used in manufacturing activities.

The tribunal ruled in favor of the Appellant, allowing them to avail Cenvat credit on service tax paid for rented premises used in manufacturing activities. The denial of credit based on the premises not being included in central excise registration was overturned. The tribunal held that services related to manufacturing final products, even if availed outside registered premises, qualify as "Input Service." The decision cited precedents like Ultra Tech Cement Ltd. and Auto Print Machinery Manufacturers to support the Appellant's entitlement to the credit, setting aside the previous denial and granting relief to the Appellant.

---

---

Issues involved:
Availment of Cenvat credit on service tax paid for rented premises; Denial of credit due to premises not being included in central excise registration.

Analysis:
The appellant availed Cenvat credit for service tax on renting immovable property used for manufacturing activities. The credit was denied as the rented premises were not included in the central excise registration. The Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the denial, leading to the appeal before the tribunal.

The Appellant argued that since the rented premises were used for manufacturing final products, the credit should be allowed. The revenue, represented by the Additional Commissioner, reiterated the denial based on the definition of "Input Service."

Upon review, the tribunal found that the premises were indeed used for the Appellant's manufacturing activities. According to the definition of "Input Service," services directly or indirectly related to manufacturing final products fall under this category. Therefore, the tribunal concluded that there was no justification to disallow the Cenvat credit. Citing various judgments, including Ultra Tech Cement Ltd. and Auto Print Machinery Manufacturers, it was established that credit cannot be denied solely based on services being availed outside registered premises.

Consequently, the tribunal ruled in favor of the Appellant, holding them eligible for the credit of service tax on the rented premises. The impugned order was set aside, and the appeals were allowed, granting consequential relief to the Appellant.

---