CESTAT allows CENVAT credit on courier, vehicle repair, insurance, and photocopy services for manufacturing activities

CESTAT Chandigarh allowed the appeal challenging denial of CENVAT credit on input services including courier, vehicle repair, insurance, and photocopy services. The revenue authority had denied credit arguing these services were not directly or indirectly used in manufacturing or clearance of final products. The Tribunal held that during the relevant period, "activities relating to business" in input services definition received wide interpretation through various decisions. The Tribunal found all disputed services had nexus with manufacturing and clearance activities, making them eligible input services. The order denying CENVAT credit was set aside as unsustainable in law.

---

---

Issues:
Denial of Cenvat credit on input services including courier service, vehicle repair service, insurance, and photocopy services.

Analysis:
The appellant, engaged in the manufacture of 'Sugar Confectionary,' availed Cenvat credit on excise duty paid on inputs and service tax paid on input services. A show cause notice was issued alleging wrongful availment of Cenvat credit on services like courier, vehicle repair, insurance, and photocopy services. The denial was based on the lack of direct or indirect use of these services in relation to the manufacture and clearance of final products.

The appellant contended that the definition of input service during the relevant period was broad, covering services used directly or indirectly in manufacturing and clearance. They argued that the phrase 'in relation to' expanded the scope of input services. The appellant cited various tribunal decisions supporting the inclusion of insurance, courier, vehicle repair, and photocopy services as eligible input services.

Regarding insurance services, the appellant received coverage for assets and medical claims of employees, essential for business operations. The appellant presented agreements with insurance companies to support their claim. Tribunal decisions were cited to justify the inclusion of insurance services as 'activities relating to business.'

For courier services, it was argued that they were crucial for delivering business documents, thus falling under 'activities relating to business.' The appellant relied on tribunal decisions to support the eligibility of courier services as input services.

Regarding vehicle repair services, the appellant stated that maintenance was necessary to keep business vehicles operational for various activities. Tribunal decisions were referenced to support the inclusion of vehicle repair services as eligible input services.

Concerning photocopy services, the appellant highlighted their importance in day-to-day business operations for copying essential documents. Tribunal decisions were cited to justify the inclusion of photocopy services as input services.

The appellant also argued against invoking the extended period, claiming no suppression of facts. The authorized representative reiterated the findings of the impugned order.

After considering submissions and reviewing the definition of input service, the tribunal found that denial of Cenvat credit on the mentioned input services was unsustainable in law. Relying on precedent, the tribunal held that the services had a nexus with manufacturing final products and their clearance, thus allowing the appeal and granting Cenvat credit on the input services.

---