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/2013-14/2083

Eligibility of credit on insurance and authorised station service availed for vehicles maintained by manufacturer.

Case:- M/s BIRLA CORPORATION LTDVs COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, BHOPAL

Citation:- 2014-TIOL-05-CESTAT-DEL

Brief facts:-The appellant is common in both the appeals and is a company engaged in the business of manufacture of excisable goods, cement and cement clinker. The appellant availed cenvat credit on inputs, input services and capital goods under Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 (2004 Rules). During audit of the appellants, Revenue observed that it availed cenvat credit of service tax during the periods April 2007 to August 2009; September 2009 to March 2010; April 2010 to December 2010; and January 2011 to September 2011, on the basis or several bills of invoices issued by service providers for Business Auxiliary Service (commission agent); Insurance Auxiliary Service (towards motor vehicle insurance) and authorised service station service (motor vehicles).
Consequently four show cause notices were issued covering the periods April 2007 to August 2009 and September 2009 to March 2010; and April 2010 to December 2010 and January 2011 to September 2011. After due process, the adjudicating authority dropped demand of service tax, interest and penalty in so far as the appellant had availed cenvat credit in respect of the input pertaining to Business Auxiliary Service (commission agent). The authority however assessed liability to service tax, interest and penalties on other input services in respect of which the show cause notices were issued, namely insurance auxiliary service (motor vehicle insurance) and authorised service station service (motor vehicle repair). The appellant as part of its business as a manufacturer of cement and allied products owns several vehicles and gets the vehicles serviced with authorised service station/other service stations. Insurance auxiliary service and authorised service station are taxable services. The appellant therefore availed these input services and had remitted the component of service taxes payable by those service providers to Revenue. It availed cenvat credit of the tax component remitted in relation to these input services, of insurance and authorised service station services. This was disallowed by the adjudicating authority.
The adjudicating authority disallowed cenvat credit in respect of the aforesaid two input services on the ground that the appellant failed to establish any nexus between its output and the two services. For this conclusion the authority relied inter alia on the decision of Supreme Court in Maruti Suzuki Ltd. vs. CCE - 2009 (240) ELT 641 (SC) = (2009-TIOL-94-SC-CX) and assumed that the use of the input service should be integrally connected with the manufacture of the final product.

Appellant’s contention:-The appellant contented that any service used by the provider of a taxable service or excisable goods manufactured, used in relation to getting miscellaneous repairs of the premises of the provider of output service or for an office relating to such premises, procurement of inputs, activity relating to business such as inter alia inward transportation of inputs or capital goods and output transportation to the place of removal, would constitute input service.

Respondent’s contention:-The respondent reiterated the findings of the lower authorities.

Reasoning of judgment:- The tribunal observed that this issue came to be considered in several judgments of this Tribunal. In KPMG vs. CCE, New Delhi - 2013-TIOL-761-CESTAT-DEL(CESTAT- DEL), the ambit of Rule 2(l) of the 2004 Rules was considered. This Tribunal held that on a true and fair construction of the definition of input service in Rule 2(l), it is clear that any service used by the provider of a taxable service or excisable goods manufacturer, used in relation to getting miscellaneous repairs of the premises of the provider of output service or for an office relating to such premises, procurement of inputs, activity relating to business such as inter alia inward transportation of inputs or capital goods and output transportation to the place of removal, would constitute input service.
"Input service" is broadly defined, as any service used for providing an output service or any service used by the manufacturer, whether directly or indirectly, or in relation to the manufacture of final products and clearance of final products from the place of removal. In this context of the statutory definition of input service, the conclusion is irresistible that the vehicles owned and used by the appellant for efficient execution of its business of manufacture of cement and allied products and the expenditure incurred in the legitimate use of such vehicles i.e. by obtaining statutory insurance for the vehicles and expenditure incurred for their maintenance i.e. for periodical service of the vehicles, would be inputs and wherever the service providers, of insurance of the vehicles or for maintenance of such vehicles are compensated in respect of the service tax payable by those entities for having provided the taxable services, those amounts could lawfully be treated as input services on which cenvat credit could be availed.
On the aforesaid premises the impugned order was held unsustainable and is accordingly quashed. The common adjudication order dated 25.09.2012 passed by the Commissioner, Central Excise & Service Tax, Raipur order-in-original Nos. 43 & 44/Comr/CEX/ADJ/STN/2012 dated 25.09.2012; was quashed. The appeals are allowed as above but in the circumstances without costs.

Decision:-Appeal allowed.

Comment:- The substance of this case is that input services includes any service whether directly or indirectly used for providing an output service or any service used by the manufacturer, whether directly or indirectly, or in relation to the manufacture of final products and clearance of final products from the place of removal and hence credit for all such inputs and input services is admissible. In the present case, as the vehicles were maintained by the manufacturer that facilitated in better transportation of goods, the credit of service tax paid for insurance and authorised service station services was allowed to them.
 

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