TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (8) TMI 595
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....lso making export of services. The appellants are availing facility of Cenvat Credit. For the period October 2011 to December 2011 they filed refund claim under Rule 5 of the Cenvat Credit Rules 2004 read with Notification No. 05/2006-CE(NT) dated 14.3.2006. The adjudicating authority rejected claim of refund of Rs. 29,10,826/- on some input services. Aggrieved the appellants filed appeal, whereby the Commissioner (Appeals) allowed refund of credit of Rs. 77,540/-. Thus Cenvat credit to the extent of Rs. 28,33,287/- on various input services was disallowed. Aggrieved the appellant has preferred this appeal. The details of input services for which refund was denied as per the impugned order is as under:- Sl.No. Input Service Amou....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he claim of refund for Car parking Services was denied, referring to Notification No. 5/2006-CE(N.T.) and held that there is no sufficient nexus between the input service and the service exported. The appellants relied on the judgments rendered in BCH Electric Ltd. Vs. CCE, Delhi-IV 2013 (31) STR 68 (Tri.-Delhi), KPMG Vs. CCE, New Delhi 2014 (33) STR 96 (Tri.-Delhi), CST, Bang. Vs. Mercedes Benz Research & Devlp. India Pvt. Ltd. 2013 (30) STR 257 (Tri.-Bang.). In these cases it has been held that the service of renting Car parking space used for parking of the vehicles of the Officers/Employees of the assessees Company has nexus with the business of the assessee and has to be treated as an activity related to business. Applying the ratio la....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....on this score is allowed. 5. The services of Renting of equipments for organizing events and Event Management Service, was denied for the reason that the invoices suggest that these activities relate to parties, entertainment activities, corporate tournaments and that there is no nexus between the input services and the services exported. On behalf of the appellants it is submitted that such events were for promoting sales, for staff development and augmenting the business of the company. Appellants relied on the judgments in Toyota Kirloskar Motor Private Ltd. Vs. CCE., LTU. Bangalore 2011 (24) STR 645 (Kar.) and Endurance Technologies Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CCE., Aurangabad 2012 (32) STR 95 (Tri.-Mum.) in which cases the issue has been decided ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....port, these input services pertains to brand HCL which is widely known for hardware and therefore the appellants are not entitled to credit. The Original Adjudicating Authority has taken this view which was upheld by the Commissioner (Appeals). The Original Adjudicating Authority for that matter has placed reliance on the reply filed by the appellants. In Para 6.14 of the Order-in-Original it is seen stated that from the reply submitted it is clearly evident that the above services are for promotion of their Brand, and brand HCL also includes hardware for which brand HCL is well known. The Counsel for appellant submitted that the appellant has nowhere stated in the reply that these input services were availed for promotion of hardware. The ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....partmental Representative. The words out of pocket expenses is too wide and lacks definiteness as to the kind of service which would qualify to be an input service. Therefore I concur with the opinion of the authorities below and deny the credit on service tax paid on these. 9. An amount of Rs. 26,050/- has been claimed by appellant towards Visa and Immigration Services. The Adjudicating Authority has allowed refund of service tax paid to the extent pertaining to the employees visit abroad for providing service there, but has disallowed refund of that portion pertaining to the spouse and daughter. It is submitted that as Resident Permit has been extended to spouse and children of employees the same has to be allowed. I cannot agree with ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....entitled to refund of Rs. 63,345/- being Accommodations Services. On behalf of appellants it is submitted that the employees of the appellant travel to different places within the country or outside for onsite support and software implementation. The employees traveling thus require place for their accommodation for which the above said service has been availed. It is observed by the authority below that the accommodation is availed for 3 to 7 days or for a maximum 30 days. This was denied on the ground that the same is used for onsite support and software implementation to the domestic customers and not overseas customers of the appellant and therefore it is not for providing output services. The appellant submitted that the output service....