TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (4) TMI 863
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ervices 606,415/- General Insurance Services 29,000/- Supply of tangible goods 53,684/- Works Contract 150,677 Total 973,792/- ST/20028/2020 April 2017 to June 2017 Architect Services 277,563/- Event Management Services 709,964/- Membership of Club 12,473/- Supply of tangible goods 61,715/- Works Contract 705,990/- Total 1,767,705/- ST/20314/2020 April 2008 to Sept 2008 Credit card, debit card & other payment card services (Bank Charges) 121,554/- Event Management Services 607,742/- Total 729,296/- ST/20315/2020 Oct 2009 to Mar 2010 Credit card, debit card & other payment card services (Bank Charges) 25,124/- Event Management Services 481,473/- Photography Services 30,410 Total 537,007/- ST/20316/2020 April 2010 to Sep 2010 Credit card, debit card & other payment card services (Bank Charges) 28,595/- Event Management Services 212,470/- ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ppellants have failed to establish nexus of input service with the output services and further the said services are excluded from the definition of Input Service under Clause C of Rule 2(l) of CCR 2004. Learned Counsel further submitted that all the services on which CENVAT credit has been availed have been used by the appellant for providing the output service and in the absence of these input services, it would not have been possible for the appellant to render the output service. Learned Counsel further submitted that each of the input service for which refund has been rejected has been held to be input service by various decisions of the Tribunal and the High Court. He further referred to each input service and submitted that as far as Architectural Service is concerned, the learned Commissioner has rejected the refund on the ground that the said input service is used in relation to construction of a building or civil structure and is excluded from definition of input service under Rule 2(l) of CCR 2004. To rebut this finding, Learned Counsel submitted that, in fact, the Architectural Services were used by the appellant for the purpose of designing the office premises from whe....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....T, Mumbai, 2017 (48) STR 157 (Tri-Mumbai) 4.3. With regard to Works Contract Service, the learned Counsel submitted that the learned Commissioner has rejected the refund on the ground that these services involved is in relation to construction of a building or civil structure and is excluded from the definition of input service under Rule 2(l) of CCR 2004 whereas the fact of the matter is that these services were mainly used in relation to repairs and maintenance of equipment, fixed assets, premises etc. used by the appellant and the same has been held to be input service in the following decisions: • Red Hat India Pvt. Ltd. v. Principal Commissioner of ST, Pune, 2016 (44) STR 451 (Tri-Mum) • Alliance Global Services IT India v. Commissioner, (2016) 71 taxmann.com 82 (Hyderabad- CESTAT Appellant has produced on record the invoices to justify their claims. 4.4. With regard to Supply of tangible goods, the CENVAT credit has been rejected or refund has been rejected on the ground that these services were used for organizing events and meetings which has no direct nexus with the output service and to counter ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t and the other for eligibility for granting rebate. Whatever credit has been permitted to be taken, the same are permitted to be utilized and when the same is not possible there is provision for grant of refund or rebate. Without questioning the credit taken, the eligibility to rebate cannot be questioned." He further submitted that C.B.E. & C. vide its Circular No. 120/01/2010-S.T., dated 19-1-2010 clarified that the condition of nexus should be read liberally and in a harmonious manner, consistent with the intention of the legislature to provide refund to the exporters and the said intention was further reflected in the Notification No. 5/2006. On the other hand learned AR reiterated the findings of the Commissioner. 5. On the other hand, learned AR reiterated the findings of the impugned order. 6. After considering the submissions of both the parties and perusal of the material on record, I find that here it is pertinent to mention the definition of Input Service as contained in Rule 2(l) of CCR 2004: 2(l) "input service" means any service, - (i) Used by a provider of taxable service for providing an output service, or (i....