TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (6) TMI 62
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....640 dated 22.10.2012 was served upon the appellant alleging that they have wrongly availed Cenvat credit of Service Tax on ineligible services : (i) commercial construction services amounting to Rs. 9,17,139/-; (ii) club membership fee amounting to Rs. 61,800/-; and (iii) maintenance charges amounting to Rs. 1,224/-. Thus total Cenvat Credit of Rs. 10,98,550/- was alleged to have been wrongly availed & was proposed to be recovered from the appellant along with the interest at the appropriate rate and the proportionate penalty vide show cause notice dated 22.10.2012. The said proposal was confirmed initially by the original adjudicating authority Order No. 58/2015 dated 31.08.2015. The appeal thereof was rejected vide the order-under-challenge. Being aggrieved the appellant is before this Tribunal. 3. I have heard Mr. Sparsh Bhargava, learned Advocate for the appellant and Mr. Pradeep Gupta, learned DR for the Department. It is submitted on behalf of the appellant that the commercial construction services, club membership services and maintenance repair services were received by the appellant as an input for providing the output services as that of the renting of immovable pr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ubmissions, learned Counsel has prayed for order-under-challenge to be set aside and the appeal in hand to be allowed. 7. While rebutting these arguments, learned DR has mentioned that appellant's case is that of receiving commercial and construction services from M/s R.K Enterprises, Jaipur but the proprietor thereof vide its letter dated 09.05.2009 has denied giving any such services to the appellant in the year 2007-08 and 2008-09. It is impressed upon that the said letter stands clearly mentioned in Para-4 of the show cause notice, the Appellant cannot have benefit of the argument that the said letter was not be relied upon document. It is further submitted that the order-under-challenge is containing the meticulous and detailed reasons for denying the eligibility of the appellant to claim the Cenvat credit. Para-5 of the order is impressed upon. Accordingly, while justifying the order-under-challenge appeal in hand is prayed to be dismissed. 8. After hearing the rival contentions of both the Parties, I observe and hold as follows: The Appellant is admittedly providing Renting of Immovable Property services, the department has denied availment of Cenvat credit qua the servic....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ation to clearance of final products from the place of removal (iii) Services used in relation to setting up, of inputs, modernization, renovation or repairs of a factory, or an office relating to such factory, (iv)Services used in relation to advertisement or sales promotion, market research, storage upto the place of removal, procurement the place of removal; (v)Services used in relation to activities relating to business and outward transportation up to the place of removal; 12. Applying the above decision explaining the definition of inputs to three of the impugned services, I hold as follows: 1. Commercial Construction Services : Apparently and admittedly, the appellant is a provider of Renting of Immovable Property Services. Admittedly, the premises for which commercial construction services were received were let out by the appellant for providing the services of renting of immovable property. These admissions clarify had there been no constructed building there would have been no possibility for any service of being rented out to be provided by the Appellant. Thus, it becomes clear that the services of commercial construction as were received by the appellant for ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... 2. Club Membership service and the Cenvat credit availed on the fee paid for the same: It was the appellant's burden to prove that this was also the service which was required for enabling them to render the output service of renting of immovable property. It is observed that except for the mention that club was used as a place to have contact with the people of standing there is no other submission of the appellant to justify the service to the input service. No document in this respect is placed on record except that the learned Counsel has relied upon ITC Ltd (supra) case. The perusal clarifies that the said decision is not applicable to the fact and circumstances of the present case, because in that the clubs were used by the assessee therein for holding business meetings, training workshops and marketing and promotional activities which admittedly is not the fact of the present case. Accordingly, I am of the opinion that no nexus has been established between the availment of Club Membership and the output service of of the appellant i.e. Renting of Immovable Property. Hence, I am of the opinion that learned Commissioner has committed no error while denying the Cenvat ....