TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (5) TMI 891
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 400 093 under Rule 14 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, read with Section 73(2) of Chapter V of the Finance Act, 1994. (ii) I order to appropriate the service tax of Rs. 956/- (Rs. Nine Hundred Fifty Six Only) against the demand confirmed as above at (i), which has already been paid by the noticee. (iii) I order recovery of interest as applicable rates on the above confirmed amount, under the provisions of Rule 14 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 read with Section 75 of the Finance Act, 1994. (iv) I impose a penalty of Rs. 2,52,527 /-(Rs. Two Lakhs Fifty Two Thousand Five Hundred Twenty Seven Only) upon M/s. Ultratech Cement Ltd., Marketing Andheri (East), Mumbai- 400 093,under Section 76 of Finance Act, 1994 read with Rule 15(1) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. However, the noticee can avail the facility of reduced penalty @ 25%, if the service tax demand, interest and penalty is paid within 30 days from the receipt of this Order. In term of the second proviso to Section 76 of Finance Act, 1994. (v) I impose a penalty of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. Ten Thousand Only) on M/s. Ultratech Cement Ltd., Marketing Division, Andheri (East), Mumbai- 400 093 under Se....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ecoverable from the appellant and whether the penalties imposed upon them are sustainable? 7. In the instant case, it is pertinent to mention that majority of the cases decided in favour of the appellant were based on the definition of input service in Rule 2(l) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 as it existed prior to 1.4.2011 whereas the appeals filed cover period after 01.04.2011. The definition of input service was amended with effect from 1.4.2011 vide notification no. 3/2011-CE (NT) dated 1.3.2011. Here, for the sake of brevity, I am not reproducing the provisions of the Rule 2 (1) of the Cenvat credit Rules, 2004 and would like to mention that the inclusive part of the definition of the input services, prior to 01.4.2011, contained the phrases "activities related to the business" and "such as" whereas the said phrases were deleted from the definition later vide Notification No. 3/2011 CE (NT) dated 01.03.2011. with effect from 01.04.2011 i.e. after amendment, the Legislature has categorically defined what is included in the definition and what is not included (excluded) and thereby, removing the inadequacy that was prevalent in the earlier definition. A perusal of the def....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t Credit Rules, 2004, the nature of the service is the sole factor for availment of input service credit used by a provider of output service for providing an output service. Thus Legislature has categorically defined what is included in the definition and what is not included. Now, for every service received for which payment has been made to the vendor is not admissible for availment of credit. Such availment is determined by the framework of the definition of 'input service' as restricted in Rule 2 (1) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. The case laws cited by the appellant pertains to issues mainly prior to 01.04.2011, hence are of no avail. I find that the Hon'ble Gujrat High Court in case of Cadila Healthcare Ltd. [2013 (30) STR. 3 (Guj.)], held that- "......... this does not mean that every activity related to business of assessee would fall within the inclusive part of definition - Activity related to business has to be analogous to activities mentioned after words 'such as'." 7.1 In light of the above facts, "Air Travel Service" is examined as under- The lower authority has vide the impugned 0-1-0 denied the Cenvat credit of service tax paid....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....pellant have failed to provide any corroborative evidence to prove that such services have been availed for providing output services. I am of the view that the definition of input services cannot be stretched to such an extent that it becomes practically illogical. If such an extended meaning is given to the said definition would lose its meaning, intended to be given by the legislation. Since the appellant has failed to establish the direct nexus of such input services for providing output services, therefore their plea that is in relation to proving output services cannot be considered. In my view, these services only constitute activities related to business which stands deleted from the definition of input services as defined in Rule 2 (1) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 and these services therefore do not have any direct nexus with the output services for providing an 'output service by the appellant. As discussed in para 7.1 above, since such input services are not analogous to the services falling within the ambit of Rule 2(1) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, hence, credit availed on such services are inadmissible. Accordingly, I hold that the Adjudicating Authority has right....