2018 (7) TMI 1202 – CESTAT ALLAHABAD – TMI – CENVAT Credit – input services – Outdoor Catering Service – Held that:- In all the rulings pointed out by the ld. Counsel for the appellants Hon’ble High Courts of Bombay, Gujarat & Allahabad have held that Service Tax paid on Outdoor Catering Service, when such services are availed by manufacturer for providing canteen facility to the workers as required by Factory Act were admissible as input service – credit allowed – appeal allowed – decided in favor of appellant. – APPEAL No. E/70291-70297/2018-EX[SM] – A/71067-71073/2018-SM[BR] – Dated:- 10-5-2018 – Mr. Anil G. Shakkarwar, Member (Technical) Shri Hrishikesh, Advocate, for Appellant Shri Pawan Kumar Singh, Superintendent (AR), for Respondent ORDER Per: Anil G. Shakkarwar The above stated seven appeals are taken together for decision since these are arising out of common impugned Order-in-Appeal No. NOIDA-EXCUS-001-APP-1444 to 1450-17-18 dated 30/11/2017 passed by Commissioner, Central
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
ing Service is not an input service. Therefore, through various Show Cause Notices issued to the said appellants there were proposals to disallow Cenvat credit of ₹ 1,80,967/-, ₹ 1,08,712/- & ₹ 1,05,115/- to MATEL, ₹ 2,72,067/-, ₹ 1,24,695/- & ₹ 2,91,389/- to SMIEL & ₹ 3,36,890/- to MSEW. The said Show Cause Notices were adjudicated through Orders-in-Original, wherein the Original Authority has allowed the said credit through Orders-in-Original as follows: OIO No. 02 dated 21/04/2016, OIO No. 10 dated 26/04/2016, OIO No. 11 dated 26/04/2016, OIO NO. 04 dated 21/04/2016, OIO No. 03 dated 21/04/2016, OIO NO. 01 dated 21/04/2016 & OIO No. 05 dated 21/04/2016. Aggrieved by the said orders, Revenue preferred appeal before Commissioner (Appeals). In the grounds of appeal, Revenue had contended that it was held by Hon ble High Court of Calcutta in the case of Peico Electronics & Electricals Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Income Tax re
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
ed at 2010 (20) S.T.R. 577 (Bombay) in Para 32 had clearly ruled that the manufacturer is entitled to the credit of Service Tax paid on Outdoor Catering Service. He has further relied on ruling of Hon ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Ahmedabad-I Versus Ferromatik Milacron India Ltd. reported at 2011 (21) S.T.R. 8 (Gujarat). He has submitted that the Hon ble Gujarat High Court in the said case in Para 6 of their judgment have held that Canteen Services which are indispensable in relation to manufacture of the final products would certainly fall within the ambit of input service as defined under Rules. He further relied on ruling of Hon ble Allahabad High Court in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise Versus HCL Technologies reported at 215 (37) S.T.R. 716 (Allahabad), wherein the Hon ble High Court of Allahabad has relied on ruling of Hon ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Ahmedabad-I Versus Ferromatik Milacron
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =