TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2010 (10) TMI 216
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... denial of Cenvat credits totalling to the aforesaid amount, on certain taxable services which were considered by the appellant to be 'input services' within the scope of the definition of 'input service' given under rule 2(l) of the Cenvat Credit Rule, 2004. The demand is in adjudication of a show-cause notice which was issued on 18-9-2008 which invoked the extended period of limitation on the ground that the appellant suppressed the material fact with intent to evade payment of duty. The appellant has contested the demand both on the merits and on the ground of limitation. 2. The Cenvat credits denied by the Commissioner were availed by the appellant on "maintenance or repair service" in respect of maintenance and repairs of fue....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nsel has also claimed support from a very recent decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court (Nagpur Bench) viz. Judgment, dated 25-10-2010, in CCE v. Ultratech Cement Ltd. [2010] 29 STT 244. It is submitted that the maintenance and repairs service in question would squarely meet the parameters laid down by the Hon'ble High Court for a taxable service to qualify as 'input service' under Rule 2(l) ibid. It is submitted that the pumps were sold to the Oil Marketing Companies on the basis of purchase orders placed by the latter on the appellant. The purchase order stipulated inter alia that it would be the obligation of the seller to repair the pumps free of cost during the warranty period. The learned counsel submits that the very sale of the g....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nnection could be shown between the service and the business of manufacturing pumps. This argument is based on the premise that every service mentioned in the inclusive part of the definition of 'input service' should meet the essential conditions laid down in the main part of the definition. In this connection, the learned SDR has referred to para 14 of the Hon'ble Supreme Court's Judgment in Maruti Suzuki Ltd. v. CCE 2009 (240) ELT 641. It is submitted that the mere fact that the cost of the service was included in the assessable value of the final product would not entitle the manufacturer to take credit of the service tax paid on the service. In this context also, the learned SDR has relied on case law. Two decisions cited by him are Kb....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t any service mentioned in the inclusive part of the definition of 'input service' should satisfy the legal requirements embodied in the main part of the definition. It also took the view that Cenvat credit on any taxable service would not be allowed by mere reason of the fact that the cost of the service was included in the assessable value of the final product of the manufacturer who claimed the Cenvat credit. This view was taken by this Tribunal's Larger Bench in the case of Vandana Global Ltd. (supra) also. This view is based on para 14 of the Supreme Court's decision in Maruti Suzuki (P.) Ltd. case (supra). Therefore, prima facie, the appellant cannot claim Cenvat credit on maintenance and repairs service on the ground that the cost of....