TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2013 (8) TMI 154
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r Chapter Heading No.38220019 and 34029011 of the Central Excise Tariff Act (CETA), 1985. During the course of audit of the records, it was found that the respondents had wrongly availed Service Tax credit of Rs.5,42,444/- paid by them on rent, security and maintenance services during the period from 1.9.08 to 1.4.09. The services beyond the stage of manufacture and clearance of goods from the factory could not be input service. Therefore, the respondents had wrongly taken credit of service tax paid on rent, security and maintenance because the services were not provided at the respondent's premises and these services have no nexus with the manufacture and clearance of final product. Therefore, they were not entitled to avail the said credi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....in the case of Ultratech Cement Ltd. (supra) and has filed an SLP before the apex court. It is also his submission that basic principle in allowing the cenvat credit is to be used in or in relation to the manufacture of clearance of final product which is absent in this case. 5. Ld. counsel on the other hand would submit that in an identical issue came up before the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of Deepak Fertilizers and Petrochemicals Corporation Ltd. 2013-TIOL-212-HC-MUM-CX and submit that the Hon'ble High Court have, following the judgment of Ultratech Cement Ltd., held that any services rendered which is beyond the place of manufacture is also eligible for availing the cenvat credit. He produces the copy of the said judgme....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n the other hand. Clause (i) above provides that the service tax should be 'paid- on any input or capital, goods received, in the factory of manufacture of the final 'product. Such a restriction, however, is not imposed in regard to input services since the only stipulation in clause (ii) is that the input services should be received by the manufacturer of the final product. Hence; even as a matter of first principle on a plain and literal construction of Rule 3(1)the Tribunal was not justified in holding that the appellant would not be entitled to avail of CENVAT credit in respect of services utilized in relation to ammonia storage tanks on the ground that they were situated outside the factory of production. The definition of the expressi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s viz. for the procurement of inputs and for the inward transportation of inputs were intended to be brought within the purview of Rule 2(l). Rule 2(l) must be read in its entirety. The Tribunal has placed an interpretation which runs contrary to the plain and literal meaning of the words used in Rule 2(l). Moreover as we have noted earlier, whereas Rule 3(1) allows a manufacturer of final products to take credit of excise duty and service tax among others paid on any input or capital goods received in the factory of manufacture of the final product, insofar as any input service is concerned, the only stipulation is that it should be received by the manufacturer of the final product. This must be read with the broad and comprehensive meanin....