Mahle Engine Components Pvt. Ltd. Versus CGST, C.E. & S.T., Indore
Central Excise
2019 (1) TMI 771 – CESTAT NEW DELHI – TMI
CESTAT NEW DELHI – AT
Dated:- 15-1-2019
Excise Appeal No. E\/53163\/2018 [SM] – FINAL ORDER No. 50046\/2019
Central Excise
MRS. RACHNA GUPTA, MEMBER (JUDICIAL)
\nPresent for the Appellant: Mr. D.K. Tyagi, Advocate
\nPresent for the Respondent: Mr. K. Poddar, DR
\nORDER
\nPER: RACHNA GUPTA
\nM\/s Mahle Engine Components Pvt. Ltd., the appellants are engaged in the manufacture of Camshaft and Cylinder Liner. They are also availing the facility of cenvat credit under Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 and payment of duty on monthly basis as provided under Rule 8 of Central Excise Rules, 2002. During the course of audit of records of the appellants for the period from April 2013 to March 2016 it was observed that appellant have availed cenvat credit of service tax Rs. 5,84,363\/- paid on Maintenance Charges recovered by M\/s M.P. Audyogic Kendra Vikas Nigam (AKVN) In<\/p>\n
= = = = = = = =<\/p>\n
Plain text (Extract) only<\/strong> = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n re eligible input services, as the definition of input service does not mandate that the service should be availed in the factory premises. The reliance is placed on the decision reported as Commr. of C. Ex., Cus. & S.T., Visakhapatnam-I Vs. Facor Alloys Ltd. 2017 (48) STR 491 (Tri.-Hyd.). Further, such services were availed for the business of manufacture of excisable goods and the business was not possible without the use of such services and therefore these services were related to manufacture of goods and therefore eligible input service, maintenance amount being part of the lease rental of the business premises. Since, the lease rental charges of the business premises are eligible input services such services remain the eligible input services. The reliance is placed on the decision reported as Phoenix Mills Ltd. Vs. C.S.T., Mumbai-I 2016 (46) STR 120 (Tri.-Mum.). = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n Plain text (Extract) only<\/strong> = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n turing activity of appellant is carried from the premises as are taken on rent. It is apparent from record that the impugned maintenance charges are the part of lease\/ rent charges. M\/s AKVN i.e. the leaser is also charging the service charges in their lease bills raised for lease amount and maintenance amount. Though the maintenance is for roads, street lights, drainage, etc. i.e. for facilities being provided beyond the manufacturing\/ factory premises of appellant but the simultaneous fact is that such services are charged on the basis of per square meter of business premises occupied by the appellant. Hence, were very much the part of lease\/ rent of the impugned premises. The lease\/ rent charge are the eligible inputs, so are to my opinion the maintenance charges. I draw my support from the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in Karnani Properties case as was relied upon by Tribunal Mumbai in the decision reported as 2016 (46) STR 30 wherein it is held that without maintenance of adjoini<\/p>\n = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n Plain text (Extract) only<\/strong> = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Mahle Engine Components Pvt. Ltd. Versus CGST, C.E. & S.T., IndoreCentral Excise2019 (1) TMI 771 – CESTAT NEW DELHI – TMICESTAT NEW DELHI – ATDated:- 15-1-2019Excise Appeal No. E\/53163\/2018 [SM] – FINAL ORDER No. 50046\/2019Central ExciseMRS. RACHNA GUPTA, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) Present for the Appellant: Mr. D.K. Tyagi, Advocate Present for the Respondent: Mr. K. Poddar, … Continue reading “Mahle Engine Components Pvt. Ltd. Versus CGST, C.E. & S.T., Indore”<\/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-16197","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/16197","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=16197"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/16197\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=16197"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=16197"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=16197"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
For full text:-Visit the Source <\/a><\/p>\n
\n3. From the argument of both the parties, the narrow compass of adjudication appears to be whether Maintenance Charg<\/p>\n
For full text:-Visit the Source <\/a><\/p>\n
For full text:-Visit the Source <\/a><\/p>\n