TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (8) TMI 1659
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....upervision of the erection and commissioning of the boilers. 2.1. For providing the aforesaid services, the Appellant has registered themselves with the Service Tax Department under the category of 'Consulting Engineer's Service' and has duly discharged Service tax liability on the same during the period in dispute. 2.2. The Appellant also engages various job workers for manufacturing various components of the recovery boiler on their behalf. This activity is incidental to the overall design and engineering activity undertaken by the Appellant. 2.3. During the period under dispute, the Appellant procured various input services such as banking and other financial services, business support services, courier services, chartered accountant's services, insurance service, manpower recruitment services, telephone/mobile phone service, technical testing service, renting of immovable property service, rent-a-cab service, canteen services, courier services etc., which were used by them for rendering the output service of Consulting engineering. Since the services were used in provision of Appellant's output service, they availed Credit on the said input services and utilised the same....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Courier Agency service Indo Shell Mould Ltd. v CCE, Coimbatore, 2016 (43) STR 307 (Tri-Chennai) 3. Staff deputation service/manpower supply service Sundaram Fasteners Limited v. CCE, Chennai [Final Order No. 40540/2016 dated 30.03.2016] 4. Telecom services Montage Enterprises Private Limited v. CCE Indore, 2015 (38) STR 219 (Tri-Del.) 5. Rent-a-cab service Reliance Communication Limited v. CST, (2018) 5 TMI 488-CESTAT Mumbai. 3.3. The appellant further submits that it is a settled principal of law that once the department has accepted the payment of Service Tax on the output service rendered by them, the CENVAT Credit cannot be denied on the input services which were used for providing the said output service. In the present case, the department has accepted the payment of service tax on the consulting engineering service render by them. Thus, the appellant submits that CENVAT Credit cannot be denied on the input services which were used for providing the said output service. In support of this claim, the appellant relied upon the judgement of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Pune-III v. Ajinkya Enterprises, 2013 (294) E.L.T.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....5.2012, an appeal to Commissioner (Appeals) has to be filed within three months from the date of communication of the impugned order. In this case, the three months period expired on 09.11.2011. As per proviso to Section 85(3), where sufficient cause was shown, the Commissioner (Appeals) can condone the delay up to the period of three months which expired on 09.02.2012. I find that the appellant has filed these appeals on 12.12.2011, which is well within the condonable period. Although I find that the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) has not explicitly condoned the delay in filing the appeals, I observe that the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) has decided the appeals on merits. Accordingly, I hold that the delay in filing the appeal has been condoned and hence the present appeals can be taken up for decision on merits. 7. Regarding the merits of the case, I find that the appellant is mainly engaged in designing and supply of recovery boilers for pulp and paper manufacturers. The activity undertaken by the appellant involves identifying the type of boiler suitable for the particular manufacturer, designing the same, arranging for manufacture and sourcing of various parts and components of the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... with the trading activity undertaken by them to the job workers. Thus, I find that there is no evidence brought on record to substantiate the allegation that the input service used by the appellant in this case were related to the trading activity. Thus, I find that the credit availed by the appellant cannot be denied on this ground. 7.4. In this regard, I find that there are two contrary decisions cited by the appellant and the Revenue. I find that this Tribunal in appellant's own case vide Final Order No.41906/2016 dated 14.10.2016 2016 (10) TMI 1192 CESTAT Chennai, has allowed the credit on all the input services as mentioned in paragraph 7.2 of this Order (supra). The relevant part of the said decision is reproduced below: 4. Contention of the appellant finds supports from the relevant fact coming out from the show cause notice. The appellant may not be a manufacturer but the services provided by the appellant as a consulting engineer was not denied by Revenue. The services so provided were also in relation to installation of the boiler as well as designing thereof to ensure that the boiler is manufactured according to the design to meet to the need of the buyers. In such e....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ent case, the assessment on decoiled HR/CR coils cleared from the factory of the assessee on payment of duty has neither been reversed nor it is held that the assessee is entitled to refund of duty paid at the time of clearing the decoiled HR/CR coils. In these circumstances, the CESTAT following its decision in the case of Ashok Enterprises - 2008 (221) E.L.Τ. 586 (T), Super Forgings - 2007 (217) E.LT. 559 (T), S.A.IL. - 2007 (220) E.L.T. 520 (T = 2009 (15) S.T.R. 640 (Tribunal), M.P. Telelinks Limited - 2004 (178) E.L.T. 167 (T) and a decision of the Gujarat High Court in the case of CCE v. Creative Enterprises reported in 2009 (235) E.LT 785 (Guj.) has held that once the duty on final products has been accepted by the department CENVAT credit availed need not be reversed even if the activity docs not amount to manufacture Admittedly, similar view taken by the Gujarat High Court in the case of Creative Enterprises has been upheld by the Apex Court [see 2009 (243) E.L.T. A121] by dismissing the SLP filed by the Revenue. 7.8. In the present case, I find that there is no dispute that the input service on which the credit availed by the appellant were used in connection with th....