AI Drafter 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2014 (5) TMI 641
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... on bills/ invoices issued by M/s Jayshree Enterprise, Rajkot who were providing Maintenance and Repairing Services of Diesel Engines cleared by the Appellant within one year warranty period. During the warranty period M/s Jayshree was attending complaints regarding maintenance and repairing of Diesel Engine on behalf of the Appellant and was charging service charge in this regard from the Appellant for the services. The lower authorities took a view that such repair & maintenance of engines during warranty period would not fall under the category of input service as the scope of the credit is restricted to the services used at factory premises and not beyond that point. Resultantly the Appellant for the impugned period i.e. Jan 2008 to Ma....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... held that no evidence has been produced that the charges related to warranty period were included in the assessable value. The Appellant is in appeal against such an order. 4. The counsel for the Appellant makes submission that the findings of the adjudicating authority as well as Commissioner (Appeals) are beyond the terms of the show cause notice. That the show cause notice alleged that the services in question are not input service, whereas the lower authorities denied the credit on the ground that no evidence has been produced that the warranty charges are part of value of the goods and that the warranty charges pertained to the goods under one year warranty. He submits that since the orders passed by the lower authority are beyond ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ISHNAN & BROS. LTD. Vs. CCE, COIMBATORE 2010 (20) STR 48 (TRI - CHENNAI), ABB LTD. VS. CCE & ST., BANGLORE 2009 (15) STR 23 (TRI - LB) and COCA COLA INDIA PVT. LTD Vs. CCE, PUNE - III. The Ld. Counsel further states that it is not disputed by the revenue that the warranty charges were not borne by the Appellant nor it is disputed that the warranty charges were related to one year period of the clearance of the goods. He also draws attention to the certificate issued by the Cost Accountant showing such warranty charges being part of value of goods and co-relation between the warranty charges and goods cleared. 6. The Ld. DR supports the impugned orders passed by the lower authority and states that no evidence was produced by the Appellant....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....thin one year warranty period, or that the charges did not pertain to the extended warranty or that it has nowhere been declared that M/s Jayshree were providing service solely to the Appellant. On this aspect I find from the contracts between the Appellant and M/s Jayshree Enterprise that the said contracts were for repairing and maintenance of those goods only which were within the warranty period of one year. I also find from the case records that the Appellant were sending monthly details of goods dispatched by them to M/s Jayshree Enterprise who in turn after undertaking repairs, if any, as per contract, were raising bills towards repairing/ maintenance of such goods. I have also gone through the literature of warranty which clearly st....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Diesel Engines. By going through the relevant provision of Section 4 of Central Excise Act, 1944, I find that the transaction value means the price actually paid or which are payable for the goods when sold and those includes servicing and warranty also. Admittedly the service and warranty is post manufacturing expenses which are to be provided to the customer after sale. I therefore hold that the Appellant is entitled for credit of the Service Tax paid on expenses on such repair and maintenance during the warranty period, which is basically after sales charges and hold that the impugned orders disallowing credit are not sustainable. 10. I also find that the Appellant in their appeal memo has also challenged the demand on the g....