Essar Steel (India) Ltd. Versus CCT, Visakhapatnam (GST)
Central Excise
2017 (11) TMI 1568 – CESTAT HYDERABAD – TMI
CESTAT HYDERABAD – AT
Dated:- 26-10-2017
E\/30985\/2017 – A\/31783\/2017
Central Excise
Mr. M.V. Ravindran, Member(Judicial)
\nSri Nikil Rungta, Advocate for the Appellant.
\nShri Arun Kumar, Dy. Commissioner\/AR for the Respondent.
\nORDER
\n[Order per: Mr. M.V. Ravindran]
\n1. This appeal is directed against Order-in-Appeal No.VIZ-EXCUS-001-APP-013 to 019-17-18, Dated 25.04.2017.
\n2. The issue involved in this case is for decision on cenvat credit availed of service tax paid by service provider under Event Management services for the period April 2005 to August 2009, this order only disposes the issue involved in this case.
\n3. Heard both sides and perused records.
\n4. On perusal of records, it transpires that appellant herein had availed Cenvat credit of the service tax paid on Event Management services, based upon the distribution of Service Tax by their He<\/p>\n
= = = = = = = =<\/p>\n
Plain text (Extract) only<\/strong> = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n y & power; Oil & Gas; Telecom & Urban Infrastructure. Therefore, said award quite evidently pertains to recognition of services rendred in the field of construction which is an infrastructure a service sector but not a manufacturing sector. Thus, it is entirely clear that said excellence award does not pertain to promotion of goods manufactured by respondent i.e. Iron Ore Pellets whereby it is quite evident that the event management service availed by the respondent is not in relation to promotion of goods manufactured i.e. Iron Ore Pellets, so as to corroborate their claim that said service is in relation to promotion of the sale of goods manufactured.” = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n Plain text (Extract) only<\/strong> = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n s also to this unit seems to be in consonance with the law. The findings of the Tribunal in the case of Castrol India Limited (supra) regarding the eligibility to avail Cenvat Credit on the said services is very clear which I reproduce: = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n Plain text (Extract) only<\/strong> = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Essar Steel (India) Ltd. Versus CCT, Visakhapatnam (GST)Central Excise2017 (11) TMI 1568 – CESTAT HYDERABAD – TMICESTAT HYDERABAD – ATDated:- 26-10-2017E\/30985\/2017 – A\/31783\/2017Central ExciseMr. M.V. Ravindran, Member(Judicial) Sri Nikil Rungta, Advocate for the Appellant. Shri Arun Kumar, Dy. Commissioner\/AR for the Respondent. ORDER [Order per: Mr. M.V. Ravindran] 1. This appeal is directed against Order-in-Appeal … Continue reading “Essar Steel (India) Ltd. Versus CCT, Visakhapatnam (GST)”<\/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-9215","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/9215","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=9215"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/9215\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=9215"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=9215"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=9215"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
For full text:-Visit the Source <\/a><\/p>\n
\n5. Ld. Counsel brings to my notice that the issue is regarding promotion of their brand “Essar Steel” and the product manufactured by them i.e. Iron Ore Pellets are used by infrastructure industries for manufacturing of infrastructure steel items, hence the credit on promotion of brand “Essar” should not be denied. He would gainfully <\/p>\n
For full text:-Visit the Source <\/a><\/p>\n
\n“11. As regards event management service, event management firms provide services to companies to undertake promotional activities for their products in various places. In the absence of any evidence to show that the said event management services were received for other purposes, the services have to be held as relatable to business of manufacturing only since the services are directly relatable to promotion of goods. Technical inspection services are availed in respect of quality verification etc. and such services are definitely relatable to manufacture. Therefore, credit is admissible in respect of such services also.”
\n8. In view of the foregoing, I hold that the impugned order to the extent it disallows cenvat credit for the period April 2005 to <\/p>\n
For full text:-Visit the Source <\/a><\/p>\n