TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (3) TMI 124
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ectly or through the dealers under the Annual Maintenance Contract beyond the warranty period. In respect of the repair and maintenance under Annual Maintenance Contract beyond the warranty period, the appellant were either providing service directly or sub-contracted the same through contractors who were providing the service on behalf of the appellant. The dispute is in respect of the cases where the appellant provided the repair and maintenance service under Annual Maintenance Contract through sub-contractors. In these cases, the appellant paid service tax on the amount received by them from the service recipients whose air conditioners had been repaired/serviced. The Appellant had paid certain amount to sub-contractors, who had undertak....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....period of 12 months. For arranging the repair of air-conditioners, during the warranty period, they had roped in the certain dealers, who had provided the repair & maintenance service during the warranty period and for which, the payment was received by them from the appellant and on such amount, the service tax was paid by the dealers. The point of dispute is as to whether the appellant would be eligible for credit of service tax paid by the dealers on the repair and maintenance service provided by them to the consumers on behalf of the appellant. The department is of the view that the appellant would not be eligible for cenvat credit demand of Rs. 9,82,03,090/- is on this basis. 4. After issue of show cause notices dated 4.8.2010 for the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....appellant and this would be covered by the definition of "input service" under its main definition clause, that the cenvat credit demand of Rs. 37,75,54,356/- is, therefore, without any basis, that the Commissioners observations in this regard in para-38 of his order that this service having been received after clearance of the goods is not eligible for cenvat credit is absolutely without any basis, as this service is an input for the repair and maintenance service under AMC being provided by the appellant and on which the appellant were paying service tax, that during the period of dispute, the appellant had paid total service tax of about Rs. 70.45 crores on their output service of post-warranty repair and maintenance of air conditioners....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....2014 (36) ELT 677 and Zinser Textile Systems Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CCE reported in 2014 (33) STR 301 (Tribunal-Ahmd.) and that in view of this, the cenvat credit demand of Rs. 9,82,03,090/- is also without any basis. She pleaded that the impugned order is not sustainable. 6. Shri Pramod Kumar, ld. Joint Chief Departmental Representative defended the impugned order by reiterating the findings of the Commissioner (Appeals) pointed out that the appellant had been registered only as manufacturer of air conditioners and had no service tax registration. 7. We have considered the submissions from both the sides and perused the records. 8. The appellant are manufacturers of air conditioners chargeable to central excise duty. Though the ld. Jt. CDR state....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d by them from their sub-contractors. There is no dispute that the appellant during the period of dispute were paying service tax on their output service on repair and maintenance under AMC Contract. In our view, the service received by the Appellant from these sub-contractors (Business Auxiliary Service) is to be treated as "input service" for the output service of repair and maintenance under AMC and the ground on which the Commissioner has denied the service tax in respect of these services is totally wrong. In view of this, the cenvat credit demand of Rs. 37,75,54,356/- is not sustainable and has to be set aside. 9. As regards the cenvat credit demand of Rs. 3,34,60,922/- this demand is in respect of the service tax paid by the commiss....