CGST & Central Excise, Chennai South Commissionerate Versus Flextronics Technologies (India) Private Ltd.
Service Tax
2018 (7) TMI 77 – CESTAT CHENNAI – 2019 (366) E.L.T. 340 (Tri. – Chennai)
CESTAT CHENNAI – AT
Dated:- 16-3-2018
Appeal No.ST\/Misc\/40794-40796\/2017, ST\/346, 347 & 350\/2012 – 40974-40976\/2018
Service Tax
Ms. Sulekha Beevi C.S. Member (Judicial) And Shri V. Padmanabhan, Member (Technical)
\nShri K.P. Muralidharan, AC (AR) For the Appellant
\nShri Srikanth Balakrishnan, Consultant For the Respondent
\nORDER
\nPer Bench
\nThe MAs filed by Revenue for change of cause title are allowed.
\n2. The above appeals are filed by the department aggrieved by the order of Commissioner (Appeals) who set aside the order passed<\/p>\n
= = = = = = = =<\/p>\n
Plain text (Extract) only<\/strong> = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n ii) Credits were availed before registration of the premises. = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n Plain text (Extract) only<\/strong> = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n ndia Wireless Solutions P. Ltd. Vs CST Bangalore – 2011-TIOL-928-HC-KAR-ST = 2012 (STR) ELT 134 (Kar.). Following the same, we hold the issue in favour of respondent. = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n Plain text (Extract) only<\/strong> = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" CGST & Central Excise, Chennai South Commissionerate Versus Flextronics Technologies (India) Private Ltd.Service Tax2018 (7) TMI 77 – CESTAT CHENNAI – 2019 (366) E.L.T. 340 (Tri. – Chennai)CESTAT CHENNAI – ATDated:- 16-3-2018Appeal No.ST\/Misc\/40794-40796\/2017, ST\/346, 347 & 350\/2012 – 40974-40976\/2018Service TaxMs. Sulekha Beevi C.S. Member (Judicial) And Shri V. Padmanabhan, Member (Technical) Shri K.P. Muralidharan, AC … Continue reading “CGST & Central Excise, Chennai South Commissionerate Versus Flextronics Technologies (India) Private Ltd.”<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-12445","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/12445","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=12445"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/12445\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=12445"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=12445"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=12445"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
For full text:-Visit the Source <\/a><\/p>\n
\n(iii) Credits availed for Rent-a-cab service and outdoor catering services are not eligible for credit since the activities have no nexus with the output service.
\n(iv) While computing the total turnover, the adjudicating authority added the turnover of the SEZ units also thereby reducing the eligibility of the refund amount.
\n4.2 He further argued that Commissioner (Appeals) has rightly analyzed the issues as well as the case laws. Following the ratio of those case laws, he granted refund to the respondent.
\n5. We have gone through the records and heard the submissions made by both sides.
\n6. With regard to the issue of time bar, Ld. Consultant appearing for the assessee has su<\/p>\n
For full text:-Visit the Source <\/a><\/p>\n
\n8. With regard to the issue of adding the turnover of the SEZ units to that of the total turnover of the respondent the Commissioner (Appeals) has discussed in para 5.2 we find that the formula applied by the Commissioner (Appeals) excluding the turnover of the SEZ units is correct and proper.
\n9. The next issue is with regard to the credit allowed on services mainly outdoor catering services, Rent-a-cab services, the period involved is prior to 1.4.2011 and the definition of 'input services' during the relevant period had a wide ambit as it included the words “activities rel<\/p>\n
For full text:-Visit the Source <\/a><\/p>\n