Appellant gets partial CENVAT credit for construction, rent-a-cab, and courier services; catering remanded for verification

CESTAT Chandigarh allowed the appeal in part regarding CENVAT credit claims for various input services. The appellant was granted credit for construction services as they related to factory setup during the relevant period before exclusion from input service definition. For rent-a-cab services, 80% credit was allowed after employee cost recovery verification. Outdoor catering service credit was remanded for verification of 30% employee recovery claimed. Credit for courier, mandap keeper, event management, and cargo handling services distributed through ISD was allowed following ITC Limited precedent. CF and cargo handling service credit was permitted as services fell within input service definition for FOR supplies. The extended limitation period invocation was rejected due to regular departmental audits and awareness of credit availment.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Denial of Cenvat Credit on various input services.
2. Demand for interest u/s 11AA of the Central Excise Act, 1944.
3. Imposition of penalty u/s 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944.

Summary:

1. Denial of Cenvat Credit on Various Input Services:
The appellant challenged the denial of Cenvat Credit on input services like courier service, clearing and forwarding service, mandap keeper service, event management, cargo handling service, rent a cab service, construction service, pest control service, drinking water service, and testing service. The Commissioner disallowed the credit on the ground that these services were not used in or in relation to the manufacture of final products. The Tribunal analyzed each service under the definition of 'input service' u/r 2(l) of the CCR and concluded:

- Construction Services: Credit denied due to lack of nexus with manufacturing. Tribunal held construction services for setting up the factory are directly related to manufacturing and covered under the inclusive part of the definition. Credit allowed.

- Rent a Cab Service: Credit denied as not related to manufacturing and cost recovered from employees. Tribunal held services used for official purposes are related to business. Credit allowed for 80% of the cost, subject to verification of reversal of 20% recovered from employees.

- Outdoor Catering Services: Credit denied as not related to manufacturing and cost recovered from employees. Tribunal held canteen services are statutory and indirectly related to manufacturing. Credit allowed for 70% of the cost, subject to verification of reversal of 30% recovered from employees.

- Services Used by Head Office (ISD): Credit denied as services were not related to manufacturing activities. Tribunal held that during the relevant period, there was no condition under Rule 7 of CCR for distribution of credit by ISD. Credit allowed.

- Courier Services: Credit denied as services were used by head office. Tribunal held services used for business activities are covered under 'input service'. Credit allowed.

- Mandap Keeper Services: Credit denied as not related to manufacturing. Tribunal held services used for business activities like AGM, product launch, etc., are covered under 'input service'. Credit allowed.

- Event Management Services: Credit denied as not related to manufacturing. Tribunal held services used for product promotion are covered under 'input service'. Credit allowed.

- Clearing & Forwarding and Cargo Handling Services: Credit denied as services used beyond the place of removal. Tribunal held services used for unloading, storing, and dispatching goods to dealers are covered under 'input service'. Credit allowed.

2. Demand for Interest u/s 11AA of the Central Excise Act, 1944:
The Tribunal held that the demand for interest is not sustainable as the demand for duty itself is not sustainable.

3. Imposition of Penalty u/s 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944:
The Tribunal held that the imposition of penalty is not sustainable as the demand for duty is not sustainable. The extended period of limitation was not invoked correctly as the appellant was under a bona fide belief and regularly filed returns subjected to audit.

Conclusion:
The Tribunal set aside the impugned order and allowed the appeal, remanding the matter to the Original Authority for verification of the quantum of reversal made by the appellant regarding 'Rent a Cab Service' and 'Outdoor Catering Service'. The appeal was disposed of in the above terms.

---