TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2011 (5) TMI 727
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....original Adjudicating Authority decided this issue against the respondent, but on appeal to the Commissioner (Appeals), the Commissioner (Appeals) by the impugned order-in-appeal No. 221-222/ST/MRT-II/2009, dated 31-7-09 set aside this order of the original Adjudicating Authority and allowed the Cenvat credit, in respect of outdoor catering service by holding the same to be covered by the definition of input service. Against this order of the Commissioner (Appeals), these two appeals have been filed by the Revenue. 2. Heard both the sides. 2.1 Mrs. Rimjhim Prasad, the learned Departmental Representative, assailing the impugned order pleaded that the Commissioner (appeals) has allowed the Cenvat credit in respect of outdoor cater....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....finition of input service has not considered the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Maruti Suzuki Ltd. v. Commissioner (supra), that Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Pieco Electronics and Eleclrieals Ltd. v. Commissioner of Incomc-Tax reported in [1993] 201 ITR 477 (Cal.) in para 13 of the judgment has held that even if a factory has to maintain a canteen, it cannot be said that it is an integral part of the manufacture or production carried out by the assessee that the canteen building may be part of the factory for the purpose of claiming depreciation but because canteen building is held to be part of the factory, it does not follow that the equipment in the canteen must necessarily be eligible for investment allow....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....catering service should be treated as an input service for the purpose of permitting the Cenvat credit, that the only criteria for treating a service as input service is as to whether the same has nexus with the manufacture and since the outdoor service has no nexus with the manufacture, the Cenvat credit cannot be allowed. 2.2 Shri Sanjeev Dahiya, an employee of the respondent company and representing the respondent, pleaded that the issue involved in this case is no longer res integra, that the same stands decided not only by Larger Bench of the Tribunal in the case of CCE, Mumbai v. GTC Industries Ltd. (supra) in favour of the respondent, but also by the judgment of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CCE, Nagpur v. Ultratech ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....in the case of CCE, Nagpur v. Ultratech Cement Ltd. (supra) has held that maintaining canteen for the workers of the factory being requirement under the provisions of the Factory's Act has to be held to be an activity relating to manufacturing business. I find that in this case Hon'ble Court also considered the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Maruti Suzuki Ltd. v. Commissioner (supra) and in para 31 of the judgment has observed that in the light of the judgment of the Apex Court in the Maruti Suzuki Ltd., the services having nexus or integral connection with the manufacture of final products as well as business of manufacture of the final product would qualify to be input service under Rule 2(l) of the Cenvat Credit Rules a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....fy to be input service under Rule 2(l) of 2004 Rules. 35. The argument of the Revenue, that the expression "such as" in the definition of input service is exhaustive and is restricted to the services named therein, is also devoid of any merit, because, the substantive part of the definition of 'input service' as well as the inclusive part of the definition of 'input service' purport to cover not only services used prior to the manufacture of final products, subsequent to the manufacture of final products but also services relating to the business such as accounting, auditing ..... etc. Thus the definition of input service seeks to cover every conceivable service used in the business of manufacturing the final products. Moreover, the c....