Chartered Accountant
Bookmark and Share
click here to subscribe our newsletter
 
 
Corporate News *  Dept. Can’t Classify Product as Zarda Scented Tobacco After Repeatedly Approving It As Chewing Tobacco: CESTAT *  Mere Uploading Of GST Order On Portal Is Not “Valid” Service: Tripura HC *  CGST Can Proceed Even If SGST Closed Similar Case Earlier: Delhi HC *  SC upholds 28% GST on online gaming with retrospective effect. *  West Bengal Govt cuts E-way Bill Threshold limit to Rs. 50,000 for intra-state goods movement. *  Criminal Prosecution Under Central Excise Act Can’t Continue After CESTAT Sets Aside Duty Demand on Merits: Punjab & Haryana High Court. *  Madras High Court Quashes GST Assessment Orders for Denial of Personal Hearing; Remands Matter Subject to 10% Deposit *  Ex Parte GST Order: Madras High Court Directs Immediate Removal of Bank/ITC Attachment Upon 25% Deposit *  J.K. Cement Receives GST Demand Order of Rs 8,02,113/- from Ahmedabad Tax Authority *  Delhi Police EOW Busts Alleged Rs. 128 Crore GST Fake Invoice Network. *  REPLY TO SCN CAN’T BE TREATED AS “EMPTY FORMALITY”: ORISSA HIGH COURT QUASHES GST DEMAND OF RS. 57.30 LAKH *  Challenge to CGST Provisions restricting ITC to Bonafide Purchasers : Allahabad HC issues notice *  CBIC Notifies Revised Customs Tariff Values for Edible Oils, Gold, Silver, Brass Scrap and Areca Nuts *  Delhi HC Orders Removal of GST Attachment After Statutory 1 Year Period Expired *  GSTAT Extends Relaxed Appeal Filing Guidelines till December 31, 2026 *  AO fails to Provide Import - Export Data from DGFT to Taxpayer for Reconciliation *  Gold, Silver Imports To Get Costlier As Govt Raises Customs Duty To 10%  *  GSTAT Enables Pre-Payment Access to Document Upload and Checklist for GST Appeal Filing *  GST Portal Restrictions Can’t Override Statute: Gujarat HC Allows Cross-State Transfer Of CGST ITC After Amalgamation *  Centre Revises HS Codes for Large Diameter Steel Pipes Used in Oil & Gas Pipelines *  Customs Duty Liability Arises On Warehouse Clearance Date: Supreme Court *  Government lifts export ban on de-oiled rice bran *  CESTAT Grants 12% Interest on Pre-Deposit for Investigation from Date of Deposit till Refund and Denies Interest on Interest. *  Government Overhauls GST Classification Framework for Non-Alcoholic Beverages; Fruit Juice Drinks, Milk-Based Beverages and Caffeinated Drinks to Attract Revised 5% and 40% GST Rates from May 1, 2026 *  India’s gross GST collections hit a record Rs 2.42 lakh crore in April, up 8.7% *  Customs clearance stalled, revenue hit over MRP dispute *  Shipping Corporation explores Middle East routes as Hormuz tensions disrupt cargo movement *  India, Kenya signs MoU for exchange of pre-arrival customs information *  No demand of Taxes under Reverse Charge if Tax Already Discharged by Service Provider under forward charge *  The India-New Zealand Free Trade Agreement, signed "once-in-a-generation" deal that eliminates tariffs on 100% of Indian exports to New Zealand
Subject News *  Consignment Sales Can’t Be Reclassified as Inter-State Sales Based on Pre-Agreement Evidence: CESTAT *  Exporter Can’t Be Denied Advance Authorization Benefit Due To ICEGATE Technical Glitch: Delhi High Court *  No GST Demand For Mere Wrong Set-Off Of IGST Credit Under CGST And SGST Heads: Kerala HC. *  Cenvat Credit Can’t Be Denied on Input Services Having Nexus With Manufacturing Activities: CESTAT *  Pending Proceedings Can’t Survive Without Saving Clause: Calcutta High Court Quashes GST Demand of Rs. 6.28 Crore After Omission of Rule 96(10) *  Madras HC Quashes GST Demands on TASMAC (Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation) Bar Licence Fee *  GST Proceedings Cannot Survive Omitted Rule Without Saving Clause: Calcutta HC *  Provisional Release Can’t Be Denied Solely On Dept. Suspicion Of Misclassification And Undervaluation Of Imported Goods: CESTAT *  Businesses Should Not Be Kept Outside GST Regime Without Due Process: Gauhati High Court *  Punjab & Haryana HC Directs Reconsideration of Contractors’ Claim for Additional GST Payment After Tax Rate Hike From 12% to 18% *  S. 108 Statements Can’t Be Sole Basis Without Following Section 138B Procedure: CESTAT *  Bombay High Court Frames Key Questions on Mandatory Distribution of ITC U/s 20 CGST Act *  Filing of Annexure-B for Refund Applications involving Accumulated ITC using the offline utility in GST portal: GSTN *  No Service Tax on Parent Company’s Un-Invoiced Cost Allocations Without Actual Service or Consideration: CESTAT  *  Calcutta High Court Upholds GST Classification of Polypropylene Leno Bags as Plastic Products *  DRC-01 Summary Can’t Replace Mandatory SCN: Gauhati High Court *  GSTAT Issues Major Bench Allocation Framework; All Appeals to First Go Before Division Bench *  ITC Blocking Without Reasoned Order Violates Rule 86A; Punjab & Haryana HC Directs Release of Credit *  Allahabad HC Refuses Bail to CGST Superintendent In Rs. 70 Lakh Bribery Case *  S.130 Can’t Be Invoked Without Prior Tax Determination U/s 73/74: Allahabad High Court Quashes GST Confiscation Proceedings *  SC grants Bail to Rs 54cr GST case  *  Karnataka HC Sets Aside Duplicate GST Orders, Orders Fresh Hearing on GSTIN Cancellation *  DRC-01 Summary Can’t Replace Mandatory SCN: Gauhati High Court *  Transfer Of Unutilized ITC After Amalgamation - Supreme Court Issues Notice *  PUNJAB & HARYANA HC QUASHES GST CANCELLATION NOTICE FOR FAILURE TO PROVIDE CBIC ENQUIRY REPORT *  LICENSE FEE, TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE CHARGES NOT INCLUDIBLE IN CUSTOMS VALUE UNLESS THEY ARE A CONDITION OF SALE: CESTAT *  DELHI HC ORDERS REMOVAL OF GST ATTACHMENT AFTER STATUTORY 1 YEAR PERIOD EXPIRED *  CUSTOMS BROKER CAN’T BE FAULTED JUST BECAUSE EXPORTER’S GST REGISTRATION WAS PREVIOUSLY CANCELLED: CESTAT   *  Supreme Court Dismisses Review Plea Against Delhi HC Ruling Holding Real Operator Behind Fake GST Firms Liable As ‘Taxable Person  *  GST Appeal Can’t Be Rejected Merely Because DRC-07 Was Not Uploaded On Portal: Bombay High Court  

Comments

Print   |    |  Comment

PJ/Case Law/2016-2017/3449

whether Cenvat credit on input services, such as, commissioning and installation, housekeeping services, air travel services and rent-a-cab services shall be allowed ?

Case-GODREJ & BOYCE MFG. CO. LTD. Versus COMMISSIONER OF C. EX., CHENNAI-II
 
Citation-  2017(48)S.T.R.88 ( Tri. –Chennai)

Brief Facts-The brief facts of the case are that the appellant-assessee are engaged in the manufacture of steel furniture falling under Chapter 94 of the Central Tariff Act, 1985. They have availed Cenvat credit for excise duty paid on inputs and capital goods and they have availed Cenvat credit of Service Tax paid on input services. The appellants were issued with the show cause notice dated 1-2-2013 requiring them to reverse the credit. The appellant has contended that these services are input services as per definition in Rule 2(l) of CCR and are eligible to avail credit of the services. The Additional Commissioner disallowed the credit on input services to the extent of Rs. 25,49,624/- as per the chart given under and also imposed penalty of Rs. 2,00,000/-.

S. No. Input Services Amount
1. Rent-a-cab Services Rs. 25,234/-
2. Air Travel Charges Rs. 18,389/-
3. CHA Services Rs. 4,69,500/-
4. Sweeping & Cleaning charges Rs. 2,36,285/-
5. Commissioning & Installation Rs. 18,000,216/-

the Learned Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the order of the adjudicating authority to the extent of Rs. 20,80,124/- and set aside the recovery of Cenvat credit on Customs House Agent Service to the extent of Rs. 4,69,500/- and also confirmed the penalty of Rs. 2,00,000/-.
 
Appellant’s Contention-Ld. Counsels Ms. V. Ubhaya Bharathi and Ms. Minchu Mariam Punnoose, appearing on behalf of the appellant submitted that the input services are essential for the assessee and the same are eligible for Cenvat credit. One service after the other was dealt with and they submitted that with respect to Commission and installation services, the very activity of manufacture of the final products would be complete only when the goods are installed in the premises of the customer and therefore without installation, manufacturing process would be incomplete and manufacture does not stop with emergence of the final product alone. Thus, commissioning and installation without which manufacturing activity would not get completed, squarely falls within the definition of “input service” and therefore, Service Tax paid on such services would be eligible for Cenvat credit and placed reliance upon the Order of the Additional Commissioner dated 7-7-2009 in their own case. They submitted that with respect to Housekeeping services, the appellants are under a statutory obligation prescribed under Section 11 of the Factories Act, 1948, to maintain the factory premises neat and clean and that expenditure incurred towards the same, when included in the value of the final product, credit on such services cannot be denied and placed reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of Commissioner of C. Ex & ST, LTU Chennai v. Rane TRW Steering Systems Ltd. [2015 (39)S.T.R.13 (Mad.)] and the decision of this Hon’ble Court in the case of Hinduja Foundries Ltd. v. Commissioner of C. Ex, Chennai-I [2016 (42)S.T.R.494 (Tribunal)].
The ld. Counsels further submitted that with respect to air travel services, such services were employed only for the Company’s executives to travel in order to upgrade the technology and ensure uninterrupted production with a better quality. Such services were not employed for the employee’s personal needs. Therefore Service Tax paid on such services would be eligible to the appellants as Cenvat credit and placed reliance on the decision of this Hon’ble Tribunal in the case of Arkema Paroxides India Pvt. Ltd. v. CCE, Pondicherry; Goodluck Steel Tubes Ltd. v. Commissioner of C. Ex, Noida [2013 (32)S.T.R.123 (Tribunal)] and Innovasynth Technologies (I) Ltd. v. CCE, Raigad [2015 (38)S.T.R.1232 (Tribunal)]. They submitted that with respect to Rent-a-cab services, such services were used for transportation of their employees from the factory to the customer’s premises for the purpose of installation of the final products at the customer’s premises and placed reliance on the decision of this Hon’ble Tribunal in the case of BSNL v. CST Chennai-II and the decision of the Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of CCE, Chennai-II Commissionerate v. Hyderabad Industries Ltd.
 
Respondent’s Contention-The ld. AR Shri S. Govindarajan, A. C. submitted that such input services in order to be eligible for credit must have nexus with the manufacture of final product and all the parts of the definition should be satisfied so as that input services becomes an eligible input.
 
Reasoning Of Judgement-Heard both sides On going through the appeal records, tribunal find that expenses incurred on services at the factory premises of the appellant-assessee are eligible as input service. As regards the service of commissioning and installation, the said services are employed only to install the final product at the premises of the customer and only upon such installation, the final product would become operational and purpose of manufacture would fructify. Therefore, the submission of the learned Counsel for the appellant cannot be faulted with and the order of the learned Additional Commissioner in appellant’s own case whereby the learned adjudicating authority has allowed the credit on Commissioning and installation services also strengthens their case.
Regarding Housekeeping services, tribunal find that the said services are employed by the appellants only in compliance of Environmental laws and in particular the Factories Act, 1948, and when money is spent for the purposes of maintaining the factory premises clean and tidy, and the same is includible in the value of the final product, following the decision of the Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of C. Ex & ST, LTU Chennai v. Rane TRW Steering Systems - 2015 (39)S.T.R.13 (Mad.) as well as decision in the case of - Hinduja Foundries Ltd. v. CCE, Chennai-I - 2016 (42)S.T.R.494 (Tri.-Chennai), tribunal hold that credit of Service Tax paid on such services cannot be denied.
As regards Air travel services, when it is not in dispute that the said services were employed only for the company’s executives to travel to achieve the business objective and the same has not been used for the employee’s personal needs, credit of Service Tax paid on such services cannot be denied in view of the decision in the cases of Arkema Paroxides India Pvt. Ltd. v. CCE, Pondicherry - 2016-TIOL-1353-CESTAT-MAD, Goodluck Steel Tubes Ltd. v. Commissioner of C. Ex, Noida - 2013 (32)S.T.R.123 (Tri.-Del.) and Innovasynth Technologies (I) Ltd. v. CCE, Raigad - 2015 (38)S.T.R.1232 (Tri.-Mum.).
With respect to Rent-a-cab service, the Counsels for the appellant submitted that such services are employed only for the employees to travel to the customer’s site in order to install the goods and without such installation, the product cannot be functional and such services are not used for the personal consumption of the employees. tribunal find that, the nature of the business of the appellants is such that employees need to travel to the customer’s site to install the products and only on such installation the products would become operational. The very purpose of manufacture of such products is only to benefit the customer for whom it is made and that being the case, cab operator’s services used for the transport of employees to the customer’s site is an integral part to the manufacture of the final products and credit on the same cannot be denied. By respectfully following the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble High Courts as mentioned above,  tribunal allow the assessees appeal in respect of Cenvat credit on input services, such as, commissioning and installation, housekeeping services, air travel services and rent-a-cab services. The penalty is also set aside.
 
Decision- appeal allowed

Comment-The essence of the case is thatCenvat credit on Input service such as Commissioning and Installation services used for installing final product at customer’s premises, eligible to input service credit inasmuch as without such installation product would not be operational. Cenvat credit on Input service such as Housekeeping services availed for maintaining factory premises clean in factory and value of such services included in value of final product. Cenvat credit on Input service such Air Travel services utilized by company’sthatexecutives in relation to business activity and not in their personal needs.Cenvat credit on Input service such as Rent-a-Cab service availed for visiting customer’s site for installation of final product is an integral part of manufacture. Hence,Cenvat credit on input services ,such as, commissioning and installation, housekeeping services, air travel services and rent-a-cab services shall be allowed.
 
Prepared by –  Pushpa choudhary

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