Catering services qualify as input services regardless of employee count, High Court affirms decisionCenvat credit - Whether the benefit of admissibility of catering service as eligible input services can only be given to the establishments employing more than 250 employees - Held that:- Tribunal after relying on the decision of Bombay High Court in the case of CCE, Nagpur Vs Ultratech Cement Limited [2010 (10) TMI 13 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT] and Gujarat High Court in the case of Commr. of C.Ex., Ahmedabad-I Vs Ferromatik and Milacron India Limited [2010 (4) TMI 649 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT], has held ... ... ... Issues:
- Challenge to Tribunal's order by Revenue regarding catering services eligibility for Cenvat credit based on number of employees.

Analysis:
The High Court of Karnataka heard the appeal by the Revenue challenging the Tribunal's order dated 16-9-2013. The Tribunal had allowed the assessee's appeals and confirmed the order of remand by the Commissioner (Appeals) regarding the verification of recovery of cost from workers by the original adjudicating authority. The main issue raised was whether catering services as eligible input services could be provided to establishments employing more than 250 workers. The appellant argued that only factories with more than 250 workers, as per Section 46(1) of the Factories Act, 1948, should be entitled to Cenvat credit for catering services.

The Tribunal, citing judgments from the Bombay High Court and Gujarat High Court, held that there is no legal requirement for catering services to qualify as input services only if the number of employees exceeds 250. Based on this reasoning, the Tribunal's decision was upheld by the High Court. It was concluded that no substantial question of law arose for determination by the Court, and therefore, the appeals filed by the Revenue were dismissed. Cenvat credit - Whether the benefit of admissibility of catering service as eligible input services can only be given to the establishments employing more than 250 employees - Held that:- Tribunal after relying on the decision of Bombay High Court in the case of CCE, Nagpur Vs Ultratech Cement Limited [2010 (10) TMI 13 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT] and Gujarat High Court in the case of Commr. of C.Ex., Ahmedabad-I Vs Ferromatik and Milacron India Limited [2010 (4) TMI 649 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT], has held that there is no law providing for catering service to qualify as input service only if number of employees exceed 250. Therefore, there is no reason to interfere with the view taken by the Tribunal. - Decided against the revenue C.C.E., CUS. & S.T., LTU, Bangalore Versus Sansera Engineering Pvt. Ltd.
Service Tax
2016 (5) TMI 660 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT - 2016 (41) S.T.R. 611 (Kar.)
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT - HC
Dated:- 19-11-2015
Central Excise Appeal Nos. 23-28 of 2015 - -
Service Tax
Vineet Saran and Mohan M. Shantanagoudar, JJ. Smt. Manjula K.S. for Shri N.R. Bhaskar, Advocates, for the Appellant. JUDGMENT Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and perused the records. 2. These appeals are filed by the Revenue challenging the order dated 16-9-2013 passed by the Tribunal whereby the appeals filed by the assessee have been allowed by the Tribunal and the order of remand passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) has been confirmed insofar as the question relating to recovery of cost from the workers would be verified by the original adjudicating authority. 3. There is no dispute with regard to the stand of the assessee that catering services are admissible as eligible input services. The only question raised before us is that such benefit can be given to the establishments who have employed more than 250 employees. Reliance is placed by the learned counsel under Section 46(1) of the Factories Act, 1948, which requires that factories employing more than 250 workers should provide catering services. Relying on the said provision, learned counsel submits that factories or establishments having less than 250 workers would not be entitled to the benefit of Cenvat credit. 4. The Tribunal, after relying on the decisions of the Bombay High Court in the case of Ultratech Cement Limited [2010 (260) E.L.T. 369 (Bom.) = 2010 (20) S.T.R. 577 (Bom.)] and Gujarat High Court in the case of Ferromatik and Milacron India Limited [2011 (21) S.T.R. 8 (Guj.)], has held that there is no law providing for catering service to qualify as input service only if number of employees exceed 250. 5. We find no reason to interfere with the view taken by the Tribunal. No substantial question of law thus arises for determination by this Court. 6. Accordingly, these appeals are dismissed.
Case laws, Decisions, Judgements, Orders