My Car Pvt. Ltd. Versus CGST CE & CC, Bhopal
Service Tax
2018 (8) TMI 691 – CESTAT NEW DELHI – TMI
CESTAT NEW DELHI – AT
Dated:- 17-7-2018
Appeal No. ST\/50756\/2015-CU[DB] – ST\/A\/52711\/2018-CU[DB]
Service Tax
Shri C.L. Mahar, Member (Technical) And Ms Rachna Gupta, Member (Judicial)
\nShri Milind Sharma, Advocate for the Appellant
\nShri G.R. Singh, AR for the Respondent
\nORDER
\nPer C.L. Mahar:
\n1. The brief facts of the matter are that the appellant is engaged in the business of trading and servicing of four wheeler motorcars as an authorised dealer of Maruti Udyog Ltd. and they are also doing the servicing of the automobile cars. It has been the allegation of the Department that the appellant is availing Cenvat Credit on the Service Tax paid on various input services such as telephone, advertising, renting, insurance, banking, maintenance and repairs, security services, and other financial services etc under the provisions of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 on the trad<\/p>\n
= = = = = = = =<\/p>\n
Plain text (Extract) only<\/strong> = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n trading has come to be included as an exempted category service only w.e.f. 01\/04\/2011 by way of amendment carried out in the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 vide Notification No. 13\/2011-CE (NT) dated 31st March, 2011 and therefore the activity of trading has to be considered as an exempted service only after 1st April, 2011 and Cenvat Credit of input services cannot be demanded prior to 01.04.2011. = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n Plain text (Extract) only<\/strong> = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n the relevant period.” = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n Plain text (Extract) only<\/strong> = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" My Car Pvt. Ltd. Versus CGST CE & CC, BhopalService Tax2018 (8) TMI 691 – CESTAT NEW DELHI – TMICESTAT NEW DELHI – ATDated:- 17-7-2018Appeal No. ST\/50756\/2015-CU[DB] – ST\/A\/52711\/2018-CU[DB]Service TaxShri C.L. Mahar, Member (Technical) And Ms Rachna Gupta, Member (Judicial) Shri Milind Sharma, Advocate for the Appellant Shri G.R. Singh, AR for the Respondent ORDER … Continue reading “My Car Pvt. Ltd. Versus CGST CE & CC, Bhopal”<\/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-13217","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/13217","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=13217"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/13217\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=13217"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=13217"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=13217"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
For full text:-Visit the Source <\/a><\/p>\n
\n3. We have heard both sides. It is a matter of record that the appellant has been engaged in trading of automobile cars along with servicing of the cars and other automobile from the same premises and they have availed Cenvat Credit of various common input services which has been utilised towards both taxable services as well as for trading activity.
\n4. We are of the opinion that trading activity abinitio cannot be considered as a “service” because the trading in the cars only involves transfer of property on financial consideration from the appellant dealer to various buyers of automobile car<\/p>\n
For full text:-Visit the Source <\/a><\/p>\n
\nWe have also relied upon the order of this Tribunal in case of Lally Automobiles Pvt. Ltd. V\/s Commissioner of Service Tax, Delhi 2018 (10) GSTL 310 (Tri.-Del). The relevant extract of the judgment are reproduced herein below:-
\n“6. We have heard both the sides and perused appeal records. The admitted facts are that the appellants availed Cenvat credit on input services and they had considerable turnover and income in trading activities. It is also admitted that the services on which credit have been availed are partly relatable to trading activities also. We note that the appellants contested the reversal of credit, to a proportionate extent, on the ground that trading is not an exempted service prior to the insertion of explanation and as such the provisions of Rule 6(3) will not apply. One main aspect is missed by the appellant in such argument. The case of the appellant is that trading cannot be considered as exempted service. It is clear that trading is not<\/p>\n
For full text:-Visit the Source <\/a><\/p>\n