TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (2) TMI 1004
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e.f. 01.04.2011, or were hit by the exclusion clause, or were common services attributable to both dutiable manufacturing and exempt trading activities. 1.2 Accordingly, multiple Show Cause Notices/Statements of Demand were issued for different periods proposing recovery of irregular credit aggregating to Rs.1,94,73,090/-, along with interest under Rule 14 read with Section 11AA/11AB of the Central Excise Act, 1944, and penalty under Rule 15 of the said Rules. The disputed credits related, inter alia, to commissioning and installation services, air travel/air ticketing, rent-a-cab and tour expenses, purchases sub-contract, loading/unloading, manpower hiring, and other allied services. 1.3 The Adjudicating Authority, vide Orders-in-Original Nos. 76 to 84/2016 dated 30.11.2016, allowed credit to the extent of Rs.23,24,753/-, disallowed credit of Rs.1,71,48,338/-, confirmed interest, and imposed penalty of Rs.17,14,834/- under Rule 15(1). The Commissioner (Appeals), vide Order-in-Appeal No. 405/2017 dated 24.11.2017, upheld the adjudication orders, and hence the present eight appeals have been filed before this Tribunal. 2. The Ld. Advocate Mr. M.N. Bharathi, appeared for the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ation are post-removal activities, rent-a-cab and travel services are specifically excluded, and common services were used for both dutiable manufacturing and exempt trading without maintaining separate accounts as required under Rule 6 of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. 5. We have carefully heard the submissions advanced by both sides, examined the appeal records, considered the statutory provisions, and the case Laws cited. 6. Upon consideration, the following issues arise for determination: - i. Admissibility of credit on commissioning and installation services. ii. Admissibility of credit on air travel, rent-a-cab and tour expenses. iii. Admissibility of credit on common services vis-à-vis trading under Rule 6 and, iv. Sustainability of demand of interest and imposition of penalty in the facts and circumstances of these appeals. 7. Having identified the points arising for determination, we now take up each issue in sequence and record our findings thereon issue-wise, in the succeeding paragraphs. Issue (i): Admissibility of CENVAT Credit on Commissioning and Installation Services 8.1 We find that the first issue concerns ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....services even under the post-01.04.2011 regime. 8.5 At the same time, eligibility of credit on commissioning and installation services depends upon the factual matrix, particularly the contractual obligations between the manufacturer and the customer. The Tribunal decisions cited above proceeded on the basis that installation formed an integral part of the composite supply arrangement supported by contracts on record. In the present appeal, however, the relevant purchase orders, customer contracts and documents showing whether installation charges formed part of the composite contract value have not been produced. In the absence of such material, we are unable to conclusively determine whether the services were intrinsically linked to manufacture and clearance or were independent post-removal activities beyond Rule 2(l). 8.6 Though the legal position stands settled in favour of the Appellant, factual verification of the contracts and related documents is necessary. Accordingly, this issue is remanded to the adjudicating authority for the limited purpose of examining the relevant contracts/purchase orders and then to decide about admissibility of credit after due opportunity t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... accomplishing business objectives and not for personal consumption. Though the Appellant relied upon other decisions such as Arkema Peroxides, Goodluck Steel Tubes and Innovasynth Technologies, we find that they pertained substantially to the pre-amendment regime or do not squarely decide the issue under the amended exclusionary framework. Nevertheless, since the records in the present appeals do not contain adequate documentary evidence to conclusively verify whether the air travel/tour expenses were incurred wholly for business purposes, issue requires factual verification. Accordingly, while rent-a-cab credit is to be rejected outright, the matter relating to air travel/tour expenses is remanded to the adjudicating authority only for the limited purpose of verifying business nexus and allowing credit in accordance with law and the binding precedent in Godrej & Boyce (2017 (48) STR 88). Issue (iii): Purchases Sub-contract, Loading/Unloading and Manpower Hiring Services (Common Services vis-à-vis Trading) 10.1 The denial of credit on purchases sub-contract, loading/unloading and manpower hiring services has been made mainly on the ground that the Appellant was also e....