M/S. Hpl Electric And Power P. Ltd vs C.C.E. & S.T. Ltu-Delhi

[Arising out of Order-in-Original No. LTU/Appl/22/2013 dated 28.02.2013 by the Commissioner of Customs, Central Excise & Service Tax (Appeals), New Delhi].

For approval and signature:

Honble Shri Ashok Jindal, Member (Judicial)

1 Whether Press Reporters may be allowed to see the Order for publication as per Rule 27 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982?

2 Whether it should be released under Rule 27 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982 for publication in any authoritative report or not?

3 Whether Their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the Order?

4 Whether Order is to be circulated to the Departmental authorities?

M/s. HPL Electric And Power P. Ltd. .Appellants

Vs.

C.C.E. & S.T. LTU-Delhi .Respondent

Appearance:

Shri Anurag Kapoor, Advocate for the Appellants

Shri R.K. Mishra, DR for the Respondent

CORAM:

Hon'ble Shri Ashok Jindal, Member (Judicial)

Date of Hearing: 30.04.2015

FINAL ORDER NO. 51551/2015-EX(SM)

Per Ashok Jindal:

The appellant is in appeal against the impugned order wherein input services credit on refreshment charges, conveyance charges and real estate agent service has been denied to the appellant on the premises that all these services do not qualify as input services as per Rule 2(L) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004.

2. The facts of the case are that appellant is a manufacturer of excisable goods and received man power recruitment agency services. The man power recruitment and supply service provider has also issued invoices to the appellant for refreshment charges and conveyance charges for the labour which has been supplied to the appellant. Revenue is of the view that these charges either are required to be includable in the gross value of man power supplied otherwise they do not qualify the definition of Rule 2(L) of the Cenvat Credit Rules 2004. For real estate agent services the same view is taken by the Revenue. Therefore, impugned proceedings were initiated and input service credit was denied. Consequently, demand of duty was confirmed against the appellant along with interest and penalty equivalent to the duty was also imposed.

3. The Ld. Counsel for the appellant submits that if these services have been availed by the appellant being a manufacturer of excisable goods in the course of their business activity. Therefore, they are entitled to take Cenvat Credit on the same as held by the Honble High Court of Bombay in the case of C.C.E. Nagpur Vs. Ultratech Cement Ltd. -2010 (20) S.T.R. 577 (Bom).

4. On the other hand Ld. AR submits that service provider has not included the conveyance charges and refreshment charges in the gross amount of providing services of man power recruitment services. Therefore, same do not qualify as input services. For real estate he submits that this has been taken by the appellant in their business activity but do not qualify for input services.

5. Heard the parties. Considered the submissions.

6. It is not in dispute that all the services have been availed by the appellant in the course of their business of manufacturing of excisable goods. Therefore, I hold that appellant is entitled to take Cenvat Credit on these services as input services as held by the Honble High Court of Bombay in the case of Ultratech Cement Ltd. Therefore, I set aside the impugned order and allow the appeal with consequential relief if any.

(Dictated and pronounced in the open court.)

(Ashok Jindal) Member (Judicial)

Bhanu

3

E/57892/2013-EX(SM)