2018 (5) TMI 860

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ance policy, transportation charges, waster disposal, translation fee and membership subscription. 2. Briefly the facts of the present case are that the appellants are 100% EOU and are manufacturers and exporters of rubber contraceptives falling under Chapter sub-heading 40141010 of the CETA, 1985 under Public bonded Warehouse License / In Bond Manufacturing Sanction Order and are holders of Central Excise Registration. It appeared that the appellants have wrongly availed CENVAT credit on input services to the tune of Rs. 49,32,425/- for the period December 2010 to September 2011. It was alleged in the show-cause notice that the final products rubber Contraceptives' attracts nil rate of excise duty as well as customs duty hence as pe....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ourts. He further submitted that the definition of input services has been given very wider interpretation by various decisions of the courts. 4.2. He further submitted that as far as the canteen expenses are concerned, they have been held to be input service and in support of this, he relied upon the following decisions:- (i) CCE Vs. Millipore India Pvt. Ltd. [2012(26) STR 514 (kar.)] (ii) CCE, Mumbai Vs. GTC Industries Ltd. [2008(12) STR 468 (Tri. LB)] (iii) CCE vs. ACE Designers Ltd. [2012(26) STR 193 (Kar.)] 4.3. Similarly with regard to freight charges, he submitted that the charges were incurred for movement of goods from the factory to the port or place of export. For this, he relied upon the followin....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Vs. Pepsico India Holdings Ltd. [2004(168) ELT 74 (Tri. Bom.)] iii. CCE Vs. Ultratech Cements [2010-TlOL-745-HC-Mumbai] 5.  On the other hand, the learned AR defended the impugned order. 6.1.   After considering the submissions of both parties and perusal of the material on record and the various decisions relied upon by the appellant, I find that as far as canteen services are concerned, the Larger Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Wipro Ltd. [Interim Order No. 1/2018 dt. 09/02/2018] has held that the outdoor catering service is not eligible for input service credit post-amendment dt. 01/04/2011 vide Notification No.3/2011 dt. 01/03/2011. Therefore the canteen services post 01/04/2011 is disallowed and prior to....