2018 (8) TMI 327 - AT - Service Tax

Appellant denied credit for catering, but allowed for short term accommodation. Clarification on Cenvat credit eligibility.

The Tribunal held that the appellant was not eligible for credit on outdoor catering services but set aside the penalty imposed. However, the appellant ... CENVAT Credit - input services - outdoor catering service - restaurant service - short term accommodation service - whether the appellant is eligible for Cenvat credit on food / restaurant services / outdoor catering services and short term accommodation services? Outdoor catering service - restaurant service - penalty - Held that:- The Larger Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Wipro [2018 (4) TMI 149 - CESTAT BANGALORE] has settled the issue and observed that the credit is not eligible for outdoor catering services after 1/4/2011 - The argument of the Ld.Consultant is that the exclusion clause as well as the Larger Bench decision would not apply, as they provide food to the candidates and not to the employees. The argument of the Ld.Counsel is neither tenable or acceptable - credit rightly denied - However, since the issue has travelled to the Larger Bench and there were divergent views prior to that, the penalty on this count requires to be set aside. Short term accommodation service availed by the appellant for giving accommodation to instructors - Held that:- The accommodation was provided only to instructors who were imparting the coaching services. These are directly used for providing output services - the appellant is eligible for credit on short term accommodation services. Appeal allowed in part. Issues Involved:- Eligibility of Cenvat credit on outdoor catering services- Eligibility of Cenvat credit on short term accommodation servicesAnalysis:Eligibility of Cenvat credit on outdoor catering services:The appellants, registered with the service tax department, were providing 'Commercial Training or Coaching Centre Service' and had availed cenvat credit on services like outdoor catering, restaurant, and short term accommodation. The authorities disallowed the credit, leading to a show cause notice and subsequent penalties. The appellant argued that the outdoor catering services were provided to candidates attending the course, not employees, and thus should not fall under the exclusion clause of the definition of input services. The Tribunal referred to the Larger Bench decision in the case of Wipro, which stated that outdoor catering services were not eligible for credit after 1/4/2011. The Tribunal held that the appellant was not eligible for credit on outdoor catering services, but set aside the penalty imposed on this count.Eligibility of Cenvat credit on short term accommodation services:The appellant also claimed credit on short term accommodation services provided to instructors conducting the coaching services. The Tribunal examined the documents provided, confirming that the accommodation was solely for instructors directly involved in providing output services. Consequently, the Tribunal ruled that the appellant was eligible for credit on short term accommodation services. The impugned order was modified to uphold the demand on outdoor catering services but set aside the penalty. The credit for short term accommodation services was allowed, partially allowing the appeal with consequential reliefs.In conclusion, the Tribunal's judgment clarified the eligibility of Cenvat credit on outdoor catering and short term accommodation services in the context of Commercial Training or Coaching Centre Service, providing a detailed analysis of the arguments presented and referencing relevant legal precedents to reach a decision that balanced the interests of the appellant and the tax department.