TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (2) TMI 141
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....motive components' falling under Heading 87082900 of the first schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. The Appellant has availed Cenvat Credit on various input services received by it. Audit of the appellant was conducted and as per the department, the appellant had wrongly availed the Cenvat Credit on various input services. Consequently, a SCN dated 08.08.2013 was issued to the appellant, wherein the demand of Cenvat Credit of Rs.2,37,57,636/- was proposed on various input services received by the appellant. After following the due process, the learned Commissioner vide the impugned order dropped the demand to the extent of Rs.47,90,525/- and confirmed the demand of Cenvat Credit of Rs.1,89,67,111/- alongwith interest and penalty. Details of the demands confirmed in respect of impugned services are as under: Input Services Period Amount (Rs) Canteen expenses incurred for providing canteen services to the employees in the factory. 2008-09 17,975 2009-10 1,08,492 2010-11 1,39,666 2011-12 13,155 Total 2,79,288 Hospitality Charges incurred to provide leased accommodation to Expats/ employees. 2008-09 9,06,645 2009-10 1....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... activity and used indirectly in manufacture of final products by way of enhancing productivity. He also submits that the appellant has voluntarily and duly reversed the credit availed on outdoor catering to the extent the amount was recovered from the employees. He also submits that the services involving credit of Rs.13,155/- during 2011-12 was received by the appellant prior to 01.04.2011 and therefore, credit cannot be denied in view of the Circular No. 943/04/2011-CX dated 29.04.2011. 4.4 As regards the denial of Cenvat Credit on Hospitality Charges & Commission (in relation to leased accommodation of the employees), the learned Counsel submits that the learned Commissioner has wrongly relied on the Circular No. 943/04/2011-CX dated 29.04.2011 to deny the credit on hospitality charges and real estate agent services on the basis that it has been used for personal use or consumption of employees and has no relation with the manufacturing of final products and clearance thereof. He further submits that the said circular was issued for clarifying the amendments made in the definition of 'input services' with effect from 01.04.2011 and not prior to 01.04.2011. He further submits....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... vendor to Maruti Udyog is required to procure such services for allowing Maruti Udyog to claim duty drawback claims. Such services used by the appellant are essential to the business activity. Similarly, the Cenvat Credit of Rs.10,382/- was also paid for the services used by the appellant for business purposes for leased accommodations occupied by the employees of the appellant. 4.7 As regards the denial of Cenvat Credit of Rs.10,197/-, the learned Counsel further submits that the Cenvat Credit of Rs.10,197/- was denied on the ground that such services were inputs for the appellant. The learned Counsel submits that this finding of the learned Commissioner is beyond the scope of SCN as there was no such allegation. 4.8 The learned Counsel further submits that it is irrelevant that whether such services are used in the manufacturing premises of the appellant or not because as per Rule 3 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, there is no condition as far as input services are concerned that the same have to be received within the registered premises of the output service provider, unlike capital goods and inputs, which are received at the factory. He also submits that these services were ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ltratech Cement Ltd. 2010 (10) TMI 13 Bombay High Court 4.10 As regard the invocation of extended period of limitation, the learned Counsel submits that in the impugned order, the demand has been confirmed by invoking the extended period of limitation which is not sustainable and the entire demand is time barred. He also submits that the issue involved relates to interpretation of law and legal provisions; hence, extended period of limitation cannot be invoked. He further submits that the appellant was under a bona fide belief that the Cenvat Credit was admissible to them. Further, the admissibility of Cenvat Credit was subject matter of dispute before various forums which established that there was confusion in the trade. He also submits that for the purpose of invocation of extended period, the department needs to establish fraud, collusion, wilful misstatement or suppression of facts or contravention of any of the provisions of the Act or Rules with intent to evade the payment of tax; whereas, the learned Commissioner has clearly failed to establish any of these ingredients on the part of the appellant. 4.11 As regards the interest and penalty, the learned Counsel submits ....