Chartered Accountant
Bookmark and Share
click here to subscribe our newsletter
 
 
Corporate News *  The GSTN has issued an Advisory dated 21.04.2026 about the introduction of an Offline Tool for the Invoice Management System (IMS)  *  CBIC extends due dates for filing of FORM GSTR 3B  for the month of April 2026 *  Interest cannot be imposed in adjudication order, if not demanded/quantified in show cause notice : Allahabad HC *  Wheelchairs with toileting facility eligible for exemption: CESTAT affirms customs duty exemption to importer *  Industries urge GST council to allow inverted duty refunds on input services *  Tamil Nadu GST dept introduced virtual hearing facility for GST appeals under under section 107 of the TNGST act: detailed guidelines  *  CIC urges authorities to implement GST evasion complaint tracking system *  Even if the assessee opts "NO" for personal hearing in form DRC-06 ,The mandatory requirement under section 75(4) to grant opportunity of hearing cannot be waived:Gujarat High Court  *  Glufosinate imports curbs imposed by govt *  Government extends Re-import period for exported cut & polished diamonds *  CIC flags lack of tracking system for tax evasion complaints,urges GST authorities to improve transparency *  No Custodial Interrogation needed in GST fraud case based on documentary evidence already in Department's Possession : Chattisgarh HC *  Orders under section cannot be sustained if passed without considering the taxpayer's objections and without granting a personal hearing:Gujarat High Court *  Mere cancellation of supplier's registration cannot,by itself,justify denial of ITC or cancellation of the recipient's registration:Bombay High Court *  High Court sets aside GST notice citing factual errors and natural justice violations *  Provisional Bank Attachment under Section. 110 of Customs Act Unsustainable Beyond Statutory period without Extension order: Bombay HC orders to defreeze accounts *  Post Clearance MRP Alteration by Distributor Does not attract Differential Customs Duty: CESTAT *  DGFT Expands scope of 'Screws' classification under RoDTEP Scheme  *  E-way bills surze to all time high of 140.6 million in March *  GST Exemption Allowed on Pure Labour Services for Standalone Houses: AAR  *  GST Payable Only on Margin in Second-Hand Car Sales, Subject to Strict Conditions and No ITC Claim: AAR *  DGFT rolls out procedure for allocation of calcined coke *  GST portal update : Pre-deposit amount now editable in Appeals *  J&K HC declared TMT scrap a 'Specified Good' eligibile for GST refunds under Support Scheme  *  Pigmy agents are employees of banks; no GST can be levied on commission  paid to them : Karnataka HC *  DGFT Revises HS Code Description for Screws Under RoDTEP *  GST Registration Cancellation Invalid Without Proper Service of Notice: Allahabad High Court. *  Bengaluru CGST | GST Backlog Appeals Deadline Fixed at June 30, 2026 *  No Time Bar on Refund of Service Tax for Services Not Rendered: CESTAT  Remands Indiabulls Case for Unjust Enrichment Check. *  Supreme Court Holds Renewable Energy Incentive Must Benefit Generators, Not Be Adjusted in Tariff
Subject News *   Delhi HC Quashes Order, Says Reminder Cannot Validate Improperly Served GST SCN *  KARNATAKA HIGH COURT REMANDS GST SHORTFALL MATTER DUE TO ABSENCE OF PERSONAL HEARING   *  CESTAT cancels confiscation and penalties on imported computer cabinet cases: Custom duty restricted to 111 surplus units *  Deposit of tax during search or investigation cannot be treated as 'Voluntary Payment' : Bombay High Court *  Section 76 of the CGST cannot be invoked where the tax has already been duly deposited, even if through another registration of the same entity: Madras High Court *  Sec 74 allows use of material regardless of source; illegality or flaws in section 67 search do not vitiate valid adjudication: HC *  Inter-State transfer of ITC on Amalgamation permissible as given under section 18(3) read with rule 41 of the CGST rules, 2017: Gujarat High Court *  HC: No GST on commisson paid to Pigmy Agents *  IGST refund denial on illegible bill of lading invalid absent chance to furnish docs; merit reconsideration in appeals directed: HC *  ITC is not admissible on GST paid on leasehold rights of land used fpr setting up an air seperation plant: AAAR,Tamil Nadu *  GST: No penalty under Section 74 after voluntary ITC reversal due to non-existent supplier : High Court *  TN AAAR denies GST ITC on Land Lease under Sec. 17(5)(d) for setting up plant and machinery *  GST proceedings quashed as notices sent to old address, despite updated address in registration *  Importer Can’t Be Penalised for Alleged IGCR Procedural Lapses Without Evidence of Departmental Error: CESTAT *  Structured Healthcare Training Not ‘Charitable Activity’, 18% GST Payable: AAR  *  CESTAT As The Appellate Authority For Central Sales Tax Disputes: A Paradigm Shift Under Finance Act, 2023 *   Rs. 25K Cost Imposed On SGST Joint Commissioner for Attaching Bank  Accounts Without Forming Mandatory “Opinion”: Bombay HC *   Ex-Parte GST Order Without Hearing Violates Natural Justice: Karnataka  High Court Quashes Adjudication and Bank Attachment.  *   Retrospective GST Cancellation Can’t Invalidate Genuine Transactions:  Jaipur Commissioner (Appeals) Quashes Rs. 95,670 ITC Demand. *   GST Pre-Deposit Non-Compliance: Allahabad High Court Allows Appeal  Subject to Rs. 30 Lakh Balance Deposit, Recognises Offline Filing. *  Documentary Nature of Evidence: Allahabad High Court Grants Bail in Rs. 32.66 Crore Fake ITC Fraud Case *  Supreme Court Flags Systemic Bias in Army’s Permanent Commission Process for Women Officers *  Re-Determination of Land Compensation Can Be Based on Appellate Court Awards, Clarifies Scope of S. 28-A: Supreme Court. *  Supreme Court Imposes Rs. 5 Lakh Costs On Rent Authority Officer For Acting Beyond Jurisdiction. *  DGGI Meerut | Court Denies Bail to Accused in Claiming Fake ITC And Export Refunds *  Denial of GST Rate Revision Benefit to Contractor Violates Article 14: Rajasthan HC *  GST Registration Cancellation for Non-Filing of Returns: Gauhati High Court Directs Restoration on Compliance. *   Supreme Court Quashes FEMA Adjudication Orders, Revives Proceedings at  Show Cause Stage. *   Higher Rank, Harsher Punishment Justified: Supreme Court Restores Dismissal  of Bank Manager in Misappropriation Case. *   Limitation for Export Refund to Be Counted from Foreign Exchange Realisation,  Not From Export Invoices Issuance: CESTAT  

Comments

Print   |    |  Comment

PJ/CASE LAW/2016-17/3133

Credit admissibility for Rent-a-Cab service, cleaning and Repair/Maintenance service of Guest House, Gymnasium etc.

Case:-  MUKAND LTD. VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, BELAPUR
 
Citation:- 2016 (42) S.T.R. 88 (Tri. – Mumbai)

 
Brief Facts:-  The appellant M/s. Mukand Ltd. is registered with Central Excise Department and is engaged in manufacturing of excisable goods falling under Chapters 72, 73 & 84 of Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. A show cause notice dated 13-4-2012 for the extended period April, 2007 to January, 2012 was issued. As per the show cause notice it is alleged that the appellant have wrongly availed Cenvat credit of Service Tax amounting to Rs. 1,80,20,547/- on the input services namely, Rent-a-Cab service, Outdoor Catering service, services by Air Travel Agency, services by CHA in respect of exports, cleaning and Repair/Maintenance service of Guest House, Gymnasium and sports club/sports ground, etc. The assessee was further required to show cause as to why the proposed Cenvat credit not be disallowed and recovered from it, and further as to why not interest be recovered and further why not penalty be imposed under Section 11AC(1)(a) of the Central Excise Act read with Rule 15(2) of the Cenvat Credit Rules. The appellant contested the show cause notice by filing written submissions. Vide Order-in-Original dated 16-7-2013, the Commissioner adjudicated the show cause notice and disallowed part of the proposed disallowance of Cenvat credit for an amount of Rs. 23,03,110/- along with interest and also imposed equal amount of penalty under Rule 15(2) of Cenvat Credit Rules read with Section 11AC. The details of disallowance are indicated in the table below :-
 

Sr. No. Name of the service Amount claimed (in Rs.) Amount of credit disallowed (in Rs.)
1. Canteen expenses 55,62,511/- 16,33,733/-
2. Cleaning expenses 33,182/- 33,182/-
3. Gardening expenses 82,501/- 82,501/-
4. Repair & Maintenance of residential colony 3,63,399/- 3,63,399/-
5. Sport Club/Ground 1570/- 1570/-
6. Vehicle Hire charges 58,63,789/- 1,88,720/-
  Total   23,03,110/-
 

 
 
Appellant’s Contention:-  As regards ‘canteen expenses’, the appellant states that they did not avail any outdoor catering services and they have not taken credit of any Service Tax paid on the same. Within the factory premises, they are maintaining their canteen, which is also a statutory requirement under Section 46 of the Factories Act. The appellant has about 1000 employees working in their factory. Appellant is availing the service of an agency to supply them the required manpower/labour to enable them to run the canteen. They have taken credit of the Service Tax paid on the services utilized by them without deployment of manpower to run their canteen. Thus, the input service is not in the nature of canteen service or outdoor canteen service and further the activity of running and maintaining the canteen is relating to the manufacturing business and accordingly, are entitled to the input service under Rule 2(l) of Cenvat Credit Rules. The learned Commissioner has also accepted that the maintenance of canteen is essential and is an essential input for the manufacturing activity but at the same time disallowed proportionate sum pertaining to the amount collected from the employees. The appellant vehemently argues that there being no outdoor catering service availed, no proportionate disallowance was called for. Further, the appellant have not recovered any amount of Service Tax incurred on the deployment of manpower for running the canteen and accordingly is relying on the ruling of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Ultratech Cement Ltd. and prays for setting aside the disallowance in respect of canteen expenses.
 
As regards the repair and maintenance of residential colony amounting to Rs. 3,63,309/-, the same is not pressed and the ground stands withdrawn. Also the demand towards maintenance of sports club/ground Rs. 1,570/- is not pressed and ground stands withdrawn.
As regards the proportionate disallowance of vehicle hiring charges, the appellant vehemently urges that there was no such proposal in the show cause notice to disallow the proportionate amount, being Service Tax credit pertaining to the amount collected from the employees. As such, the same is beyond the scope of show cause notice and accordingly, fit to be set aside.
As regards gardening expenses, it is pointed out that the same are essential for running the factory in support of which the appellant have produced the “Consent to operate” letter issued by the ‘Maharashtra Pollution Control Board’ dated 26-3-2007, wherein the Pollution Control Board considering the parameters that the Trade Effluent and discharge sewage, etc., have given the consent subject to the condition that green belt afforestation is to be done up to 33% on available open space land as per the said consent letter. Thus, maintenance/afforestation and green belt in and around factory premises is an essential part, is the Mandatory Activity under the law of the land, so as to comply with the provisions of Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 and Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 read with relevant Rules. Accordingly, the disallowance is uncalled for and pleads the same to be set aside.
As regards cleaning expenses of Rs. 33,182/-, it is stated that the residential colony is situated within the factory premises, forming part of the factory area, as per approved map by the Central Excise authority.Further, the colony is an ‘industrial township’ and the appellant is responsible to provide all types of municipal services in the colony. As such, the disallowance is bad, and fit to be set aside.
 
 
Respondent’s Contention:-The respondent reiterated the findings of the lower authorities.
 
 
Reasoning Of Judgment: Having considered the rival contentions and perusing the appeal filed and the documents produced by the appellant, as regards the ‘canteen expenses’, which is only the labour component for manpower engaged for running the canteen, Tribunal hold that no proportionate disallowance is called for as there is no element of outdoor catering nor there is any element for recovery of Service Tax from the employees.
As regards the ‘gardening expenses’, the credit on the same is fully allowable as the same is required for maintaining the good atmosphere in the manufacturing area and also a condition precedent as laid down by the State Pollution Control Board, without which the appellant cannot resort to manufacturing Activity.
As regards the ‘cleaning expenses’, the same have been incurred in the maintenance of residential colony, which forms part of the factory premises, Tribunal take notice of the fact that the colony is part of the factory premises as per the approved map by the Central Excise authorities. Further, there is no municipality in the area where the factory and colony is located for providing the services of township maintenance. The colony is a small industrial township, created by the appellant for running its factory and as an industrial township; the same is required to be maintained by the Industry itself (Article 243 of the Constitution of India). As such the disallowance of cleaning expenses is set aside. As regards the proportionate disallowance for the vehicle hiring charges, Tribunal found that there is no allegation in the show cause notice to disallow any proportionate amount towards the amount recovered in part from the employees and as such the said disallowance is held to be unsustainable and the same is set aside.
 
In view of the above findings, the appeal is allowed.
 
Decision:-Appeal allowed.

Comment:- The crux of the case is that the benefit of cenvat credit is admissible as far as the services are related to manufacturing activities or are statutorily required to be availed in accordance with the provisions of any law for the time being in force.

Prepared By: - Alakh Bhandari
 
 
 

Department News


Query

 
PRADEEP JAIN, F.C.A.

Head Office : -

Address :
"SUGYAN", H - 29, SHASTRI NAGAR, JODHPUR (RAJ.) - 342003

Phone No. :
0291 - 2439496, 0291 - 3258496

Mobile No. :
09314722236

Fax No. :0291 - 2439496


Branch Office : -

Address:
1008, 10th FLOOR, SUKH SAGAR COMPLEX,
NEAR FORTUNE LANDMARK HOTEL, USMANPURA,
ASHRAM ROAD, AHMEDABAD-380013

Phone No. :
079-32999496, 27560043

Mobile No. :
093777659496, 09377649496

E-mail :pradeep@capradeepjain.com