Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / RSS

2019 (3) TMI 1884

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....f service tax paid on the input services used/utilized for providing the taxable output services. During the period from 2007-08 to 2012-13, the appellant had availed Cenvat credit on various taxable services, considering the same as input service. However, during the course of verification of records under EA-2000 audit, the department observed that the appellant had wrongly availed Cenvat credit in respect of certain services, which were not used for providing the output services and that some of the branch offices were not included in the Centralization Registration Certificate issued by the department in favour of the appellant. Thus, the audit wing concluded that the services on which Cenvat credit was availed by the appellant were not....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... submitted that the addresses of the said premises of the appellant were subsequently included in the Centralized Registration and accordingly, Cenvat credit pertaining to the said premises should be available to the appellant. To strengthen the case of the appellant that Cenvat benefit should be available to it, the Learned Advocate has relied upon the following decisions rendered by the judicial forum : (i)      DBOI Global Services Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Service tax, Mumbai, 2017 (48) S.T.R. 157 (ii)    Accenture Services Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner of ST, Mumbai-II, 2015 (40) S.T.R. 719 (Tri. - Mum.) (iii)   Commissioner of Central Excise, Vadodara v. Video....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ra Wireless (India) Pvt. Ltd., 2016 (43) S.T.R. 542 (Kar.) 3. On the other hand, the Learned AR appearing for the Revenue reiterated the findings recorded in the impugned order and relied upon the following judgments delivered by the judicial forums to strengthen the stand of Revenue that Cenvat credit availed and utilized by the appellant is not in conformity with the Cenvat statute and thus, denial of such credit by the department is proper and justified : (i)         CCE v. Ultra Tech Cement, 2018-TIOL-42-SC-CX = 2018 (9) G.S.T.L. 337 (S.C.) (ii)       CCE v. Manikgarh Cement Ltd., 2010 (20) S.T.R. 456 (Bom.) (iii)   &n....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....-4-2011. Under the unamended provisions (effective up to 31-3-2011), the phrase 'activities relating to business' was specifically finding place in the inclusive part of the definition of 'input service'. The inclusive definition in a fiscal statute is a well recognized device to enlarge the meaning of the word defined and it expands the meaning of the basic definition. If the expenses incurred by the assessee for using the disputed services are meant for accomplishing the business activities and also the same form part of the cost of the ultimate services provided by it, then the same should be considered as 'input service' under such definition clause. The effect of amendment of the definition of input service w.e.f. 1-4-2011 is that cert....