TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (9) TMI 691
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....movable property, Security Software, Telephone, Training and foreign Outsourcing service etc and used them for rendering the output services exported and had filed refund claims on various dates under Rule 5 of the CCR 2004 read with Notifn.No.5/2006CE(NT) dt.14.03.2006. 3. While the original adjudicating authority had granted refund, revenue had preferred an appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) stating that certain services were not eligible for CENVAT Credit and that documents were not proper for claim of credit. The Commissioner (Appeals) had partially allowed the appeals. Aggrieved by the order of the Commissioner (Appeals), the Appellant has preferred appeals before this bench. The summary of appeals has been provided in the following table: S.No Appeal No. Period Issue Amount under dispute Order in Appeal No. Order in Original No. 1. ST /42508 & 42509/ 2015 July Sept. 2012 and October to December 2012 In respect of certain input credit invoices, service tax was not mentioned in the invoices 55,578 284 & 285/2015 dated 25.09.2015 176/2013 dated 31.12.2013 and 01/2014 dated 06.01.2014 ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... observations for these two services. 4. Shri S. Ramachandran, learned consultant for the appellant, as regards denial of input service, submitted that the learned Commissioner (Appeals) had given a narrow interpretation of inclusive part of definition and rejected refund on certain input services, which is totally incorrect since the services specified in inclusive part were only illustrative and not exhaustive. 5. Further the learned consultant placed reliance on the following case laws:- 1. CCE Vs. Ultratech Cement Ltd. (2010 (260) ELT 369 (Bom.) paras 28, 34 & 35) 2. CCE, Bangalore-III Vs Stanzen Toyotetsu India (p) Ltd - 2011-TIOL-866-HC-KAR-STPara (10): 3. Ramala Sahkari Chini Mills Ltd UP Vs CCE Meerut I 2016-TIOL-20-SC-CX-LB 4. C.C.E., Pune vs Emerson Innovation Center - 2015-TIOL-887-CESTAT-MUM He had also placed heavy reliance on the CBEC circular No.120/01/2010-S.T. dated 19.01.2010 which states as follows:- "3.1 Use of different phrases in rules and notification [para 2(a)] : 3.1.1?The primary objection indicated by the field formations is that the language of Notification No. 5/2006-C.E. (N.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rtain invoices on grounds that description of input service has not been mentioned properly, it is submitted that the appellant had given clear evidences before Commissioner (Appeals) explaining nature of service rendered by such input service providers and also justified the essentiality of such input services in rendering their output services. 8. As regards the rejection of refund on ground that service tax was not claimed in invoices, the learned counsel submitted that they had made service tax payments under reverse charge. They also produced copies of invoices in support of their claim. 9. Shri A. Cletus, ADC (A.R), representing the Department had re-iterated the Order in Appeal. 10. I have carefully gone through the records and heard both sides. The brief facts of the case is that the appellant is a 100% EOU engaged in the service of information technology service named E publishing of books , they are exporting output service namely information technology software service which is covered under section 3(iii) of the Service Tax Rules, 2005. The appellants had availed various input services in the course of providing their output service. Since the appellants could ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ive service which has a direct relation to the provision of their service and hence cannot be construed as a mere welfare measure and placed reliance on the following case laws:- 1. CCE Bangalore-I vs. Interplex Electronics India Pvt. Ltd - 2015 (039) STR 0578 Kar. 2. CCE NASIK Vs CABLE CORPORATION OF INDIA LTD. - 2008 (12) S.T.R. 598 I find that the contention of the appellant is correct since Rent-a-Cab service is used for transportation of employees to work. It has to be considered as being used for the provision of output service and for promoting the business as any facility given to the employees will result in greater efficiency and promotion of business. Hence, by following the decision of the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka referred supra, I allow the credit availed for the Rent-a-Cab service. iii) CONSULTANCY SERVICES 14. As regards management consultancy service, the appellants submitted that they had provided expert guidance by conducting seminars in the area of sales, marketing and business promotion activities and consultancy support services by way of demonstration of capabilities of the company in rendering of service to the foreign client....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ts submitted that it was incurred for providing food to employees. The same cannot be categorized as mere staff welfare activity. They help in keeping the morale of the employees and boost productivity. I find that the submission of the appellants is not acceptable for the reason that meal coupon is one of a welfare activity for the employees and definition under Rule 2 (l) cannot be stretched too far to make the welfare activities also within the purview of the input service definition and hence the credit is not eligible for such services. viii) DG HIRE CHARGES 20. With regard to the DG HIRE CHARGES, it was submitted by the appellant that for rendering of continuous service to their clients located abroad, continuous power supply was an essential requirement, therefore DG Hire Charges paid for operating of Diesel Generating sets at the premises of the appellant are very much eligible for refund. ix) INSURANCE CHARGES 21. Further, with regard to the INSURANCE CHARGES paid to M/s. National Insurance Company Ltd., it was submitted that for risk coverage and up-keep of electronic systems and appliances installed in the premises of the appellant, they have availed the same....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f effluents from a plant is not an essential and integral part of the process of manufacture in the plant. The emphasis that has rightly been laid in recent years upon the environment and pollution control requires that all plants which emit effluents should be so equipped as to rid the effluents of dangerous properties. The apparatus used for such treatment of effluents in a plant manufacturing a particular end-product is part and parcel of the manufacturing process of that end-product." Therefore I find that the ratio laid down by the Apex Court is squarely applicable to the appellant s case also and hence are eligible to refund of credit pertaining to the maintenance of sewage treatment plant. xiii) AIR TRAVEL AGENT 26. I find that the services of the air travel agent was availed for making travel arrangements of employees to meet clients in connection with marketing and accordingly shall be eligible for refund. xiv) CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT SERVICE 27. With regard to the Chartered Accountant service, I find that it is part of the auditing activity and is done to ensure accuracy of financial and other records which are vital for the business of the appellant. Further ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e providers ii) Description of input service not mentioned properly iii) Service tax not claimed in invoices i) Non availability of registration details of input service providers 34. As regards denial of credit on account of non availability of registration details of input service providers, it is seen from the order of the Ld. Commissioner(Appeals), that a credit of Rs. 55,578/- had been rejected for the reason that the invoice copies did not contain the registration number of the service provider. The learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the registration details of such input service providers which had been collected from the CBEC official website, had been provided before the Commissioner (Appeals). On perusal of the documents, it is seen that the registration details of all such input service providers were available and therefore the rejection of refund on the ground of non availability of registration number in the invoice is not maintainable and consequently refund amounting to Rs. 55,578/-covered by such input service invoices are very much allowable. 35. In view of the same, the impugned O-in-As to the extent of rejection of refund, on ground....