AI Drafter 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (11) TMI 1135
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ory is removed from the inclusion clause of definition of input service under Rule 2(l), it does not adversely affected the eligibility of cenvat credit on renting of immovable property service. He submits that despite the said amendment the renting of immovable property service is clearly covered under the main clause of the definition as the same is used in relation to providing output service by the appellant. In support he placed reliance on the following judgments: Navin Flourine International Ltd. 2024 (10) TMI 1396-CESTAT Roquette Riddhi P. Ltd. 2024 (1) TMI 1210 - CESTAT General Motors India Pvt Ltd. 2023 (11) TMI 304-CESTAT 2.1 He further submits that even as per the amendment in the definition of input service in Rule 2(l) by Notification No. 3/2011-CE (NT) dated 01.03.2011 w.e.f. 01.04.2011 certain services were excluded from the definition of input service, however, the service of renting of immovable property service does not fall under the exclusion clause of the definition. For this reason also the cenvat credit is clearly admissible as held in the above judgments. He also submits that the demand was confirmed by invoking extended period....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ssed the following order: "4. We have carefully considered the submissions made by both the sides and perused the records. We find that the Cenvat credit on various services were denied by the lower authority on the ground that these services are related to the "setting up of factory" which was excluded from the inclusion clause of the definition. For ease of reference the definition of input service during the relevant period that is after 01.04.2011 amendment in Rule 2(l) of Cenvat Credit Rules,2004 reads as under:- "Definition of input service w.e.f. 01.04.2011 (l) "input service" means ................; but excludes services,- (A) specified in sub-clauses (p), (zn), (zzl), (zzm), (zzq), (zzzh) and (zzzza) of clause (105) of section 65 of the Finance Act (hereinafter referred as specified services), in so far as they are used for - (a) construction of a building or a civil structure or a part thereof; or (b) laying of foundation or making of structures for support of capital goods, except for the provision of one or more of the specified services; or The exclusion clause in theCenvat Credit Rules, 2004 was amended wi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... order: "4. We have carefully considered the submission made by both the sides and perused the records. We agree with the submission of learned Counsel that all the three issues are squarely covered by various judgments of this Tribunal. 5. As regard the issue A on the fact there is no dispute that all the invoices were issued prior to 18.09.2014. Therefore, the 3 rd Proviso to Rule 4 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 inserted with effect from 18.09.2014 shall not apply in respect of the invoices issued prior to 18.09.2014. Accordingly, on that basis the Cenvat credit could not have been dis-allowed. This issue is covered by the following judgment:- a) In the case of Roquette Riddhi Siddhi Pvt. Ltd. (supra) CESTAT Bangalore has passed the following decision:- 6.3. The second issue arises in Appeal No. E/20044/2017 is that whether the appellant can avail cenvat credit on the invoices issued prior to 01/09/2014 within six months after the issuance of the Notification No. 21/2014 CE (NT) dated 11/07/2014 or not? The said issue has been settled by this Tribunal in the case of Bharat Aluminium Company Limited wherein this Tribunal has observed as under: ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e is squarely covered by the decision of Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in the case of Global Ceramics Pvt. Ltd., (supra) wherein following has been observed: 17. There is substance in the contention of the Learned Counsel for the Assesses in both the cases that the above amended provision cannot be given retrospective effect. As explained in Eicher Motors Ltd. v. Union of India (supra) the rule of lapse of credit lying with it unutilized on the date of amendment, cannot be applied to the goods manufactured prior to the date of the amendment. This is based on the principle that the right to adjustment of tax on final products accrues to an Assessee on the date when they paid the tax on the raw materials and that right would continue until the facility available thereto gets worked out. In fact, the judgment in Osram Surya (P) Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Indore (supra) approvingly refers to the judgment in Eicher Motors Ltd. v. Union of India (supra). 18. In the present case, the credit accrued when CVD was paid on finished goods deemed to be cleared from home consumption when the dealers sold the goods at higher price by altering the MRP. The right to the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Court held as under : "30. To sum up we are of the opinion that the benefit of credit of eligible duties on the purchases made by the first stage dealer as per the then existing CENVAT credit rules was a vested right. By virtue of clause (iv) of Sub-Section (3) of Section 140A such right has been taken away with retrospective effect in relation to goods which were purchased prior to one year from the appointed day. This retrospectivity given to the provision has no rational or reasonable basis for imposition of the condition. The reasons cited in limiting the exercise of rights have no co-relation with the advent of GST regime. Same factors, parameters and considerations of "in order to corelate the goods or administrative convenience" prevailed even under the Central Excise Act and the CENVAT Credit Rules when no such restriction was imposed on enjoyment of CENVAT credit in relation to goods purchased prior to one year." 22. Consequently, in the present case, the Court is satisfied that the Amendment to Rule 4(1) CCRs prescribing a time limit for claiming Cenvat Credit will not apply to the consignments in the present case where the import took place prior to th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... cost of manufacturing of cement. Therefore, it cannot be said that the Dredging Service is used for the removal of final product from place of removal. Also as per Hon'ble Bombay High Court judgement in the case of CC Ex., Nagpur vs Ultratech Cement Ltd 2010 (20) STR 577 (Bom.) it was held that if the cost of input service is borne by the assessee and the same stand absorbed in the cost of final product, such services are qualified as input services and accordingly the CENVAT Credit is admissible. Considering the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble High Court and the facts of the present case, I am of the considered view that the Dredging Services used by the appellant is an input services, hence, CENVAT Credit is admissible. I also observed that merely because the service was availed outside the factory of the appellant the credit cannot be denied. Whether the service is availed in the factory or outside the factory, only requirement is that it should be in relation to the manufacture of final product, therefore, the CENVAT Credit is admissible. Accordingly I set aside the impugned order and allow the appeal." b) In the case of Swiss Galscote Equipments (Supra) this Tribunal ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....al Excise, Nagpur Versus Ultratech Cement 2010 (260) E.L.T. 369 (Bom.) 2010-TIOL-745-HCU- ST in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Nagpur Versus Ultratech Cement Ltd. And 2013 (32) S.T.R. 532 (Bom.)=2013-TIOL-212-HC-MUM-Cx in the case of Deepak Fertilizers & Petrochemicals Corporation Ltd. Versus C.C.Ex.Belapur. The question between the parties is whether the respondent was entitled to credit on management, maintenance or repair services provided on windmills installed by the respondents. The answer lies in interpretation of Rule 2(B) (k), (1) (m), 3 and 4 of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. The relevant Rule 2(B) (k), (1), 3 and 4 of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 read as under: "2(B)(k) "Input" means (i) all goods, except light diesel oil, high speed diesel oil and motor spirit, commonly known a petrol, used in or in relation to the manufacture of final products whether directly or indirectly and whether contained in the final product or not and includes lubricating oils, greases, cutting oils, coolants, accessories of the final products cleared along with the final product goods used as paint, or as packing material, or as fuel, or for generation of electricity o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....duct or premises of the provider of output service on or after the 10th day of September 2004; and [ii] any input service received by the manufacturer of final product or by the provider of output services on or after the 10 th day of September, 2004 Including the said duties, or tax, or cess paid on any input or input service, as the case ay be, used in the manufacture of intermediate products, by a jobworker availing the benefit of exemption specified in the notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Finance (Department of Revenue) No.214/86 Central Excise, dated the 25 th March, 1986, published in the Gazette of India vide number G.S.R.547(E), dated the 25 th March, 1986, and received by the manufacturer for use in, or in relation to the manufacture of final product on or after the 10 th day of September, 2004. Rule 4: Conditions for allowing CENVAT credit (1) The CENVAT credit in respect of inputs may be taken immediately on receipt of the inputs in the factory of the manufacturer or in the premises of the provider of output service. [Provided that in respect of final products, namely, articles of jewellery falling under headi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ervices of the description falling in sub-clauses (1) and (II). Rule 2(1) then provides an inclusive definition by enumerating certain specified services. Among those services are services pertaining to the procurement of Inputs and inward transportation of inputs. The Tribunal, proceeded to interpret the inclusive part of the definition and held that the Legislature restricted the benefit of Cenvat credit for input services used in respect of inputs only to these two categories viz. for the procurement of inputs and for the inward transportation of inputs. This interpretation which has been placed by the Tribunal is ex-facie contrary to the provisions contained in Rule 2 (l). The first part of Rule 2(l) inter alia covers any services used by the manufacturer directly or indirectly, in or in relation to the manufacture of final products. The inclusive part of the definition enumerates certain specified categories of services. However, it would be farfetched to interpret Rule 2 (l) to mean that only two categories of services in relation to inputs viz. for the procurement of inputs and for the inward transportation of inputs were intended to be brought within the purview of Rule 2 (....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....re is no dispute that the service was received by the appellant in their factory. Even though the address of head office is mentioned but so long the input service was received by the appellant for their factory, the credit cannot be denied. There is no case of the department that the credit on such invoice has been taken in appellant's other unit. This issue has been considered by this Tribunal in the case of Madhya Pradesh Consultancy Organization Ltd. (supra), the relevant para 14 is reproduced below:- "14. Regarding denial of Cenvat credit of Rs. 22,500/-, the appellant pleaded that such denial is only on the ground that the invoices were not in the appellant's name but were [sic] in the name of branch/head office. We note that this cannot be the reason for denial of credit. There is no allegation or finding to the effect that the input services were not received by the appellant or the said services were not covered under the scope of eligible input services in terms of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. In such situation, we find that the denial of credit only on the ground that the address of branch office or head office was mentioned instead of appellant's address cann....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the details of duty or service tax payable, description of the goods or taxable service, assessable value, Central Excise or Service tax registration number of the person issuing the invoice, as the case may be, name and address of the factory or warehouse or premises of first or second stage dealers or provider of output service, and the Deputy Commissioner of Central Excise or the Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise, as the case may be, is satisfied that the goods or services covered by the said document have been received and accounted for in the books of the account of the receiver, he may allow the Cenvat credit. Though I agree with the contention of the Noticee that the Cenvat credit rules do not state that the premises of the recipient has to be registered preemies in order to avail the Cenvat credit, yet in view of the rules quoted herein above i.e. either rule 4 or rule 9 of CCR, the name and address of the person receiving the service is of utmost importance. In the given case the name and address of the service recipient pertains to the branch which is not registered with the jurisdictional authorities. Now, when the Cenvat credit rule gives a discretion to the dep....