Input service admissibility confirmed; Cenvat credit allowed for housekeeping, catering and rent-a-cab, extended limitation not attracted.

Admissibility of Cenvat credit was determined by applying the definition of input service and the integral-connection test: cleaning/housekeeping, outdoor catering and rent-a-cab services qualify as input services when they are integrally connected to provision of output services, and therefore Cenvat credit on those services is allowed and the related demand unsustainable. Separately, invocation of the extended period of limitation requires suppression of facts with intent to evade tax; on the facts there was no such suppression and the extended limitation is not attracted, so the demand for the earlier period is time-barred.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether Cenvat credit is admissible on input services comprising cleaning/housekeeping, outdoor catering and rent-a-cab services for the period in issue; (ii) Whether the demand for the period is sustainable by invoking the extended period of limitation.

Issue (i): Admissibility of Cenvat credit on cleaning/housekeeping, outdoor catering and rent-a-cab services.

Analysis: The matter examines whether the impugned input services fall within the definition of "input service" under Rule 2(1) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 and whether they are integrally connected to the provision of output services. Prior decisions and the Board circular are considered as guiding authorities on whether services necessary for maintaining business operations or ensuring employee availability and welfare qualify as input services.

Conclusion: The Cenvat credit on cleaning/housekeeping, outdoor catering and rent-a-cab services is admissible and the demand on these services is not sustainable.

Issue (ii): Validity of invoking the extended period of limitation for the demand.

Analysis: The question is whether there was suppression of facts with intent to evade tax such as to justify invocation of extended limitation. The facts include declared returns and absence of allegations of deliberate suppression that would attract extended limitation provisions.

Conclusion: The invocation of the extended period of limitation is not sustained; the demand for the earlier period is barred by limitation.

Final Conclusion: The appeal is allowed with consequential reliefs, resulting in cancellation of the confirmed demand and penalty in respect of the impugned input services and disallowance of the extended period invocation.

Ratio Decidendi: Services that are integrally connected to the functioning of the business or necessary to ensure availability and efficiency of output service provision qualify as "input service" under Rule 2(1) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, and absence of suppression precludes invocation of the extended period of limitation.

---