Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
Cce, Delhi vs M/S. Rico Auto Industries Ltd on 5 June, 2013
IN THE CUSTOMS, EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX
APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, NEW DELHI
COURT NO. III
Appeal No. E/2059 & 2246/2012-EX(SM)
[Arising out of Order-In-Appeal No-162/BK/GGN/138/11/1435 dated 30.03.2012 passed by CCE, Delhi-lll at Gurgaon]
For approval and signature:
Honble Ms. Archana Wadhwa, Judicial Member
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?
CCE, Delhi Appellant
Vs.
M/s. Rico Auto Industries Ltd. Respondents
Coram: Honble Ms. Archana Wadhwa, Judicial Member Appearance:
Shri. Sanjay Jain & Shweta Bector, AR for the Appellant Shri. Hemant Bajaj, Advocate for the Respondent Date of Hearing: 05.06.2013 FINAL ORDER NO. 56547-56548/2013_ Per Ms. Archana Wadhwa:
Both the appeals, one filed by the appellant-assessee and other by the Revenue are being disposed of by a common order as they arise out of the same impugned order of Commissioner (Appeals) vide which he has allowed the Cenvat credit in respect of certain services and disallowed the same in respect of other services.
2. For better appreciation I reproduce the chart produced by the assessee and various decisions covering the issue involved 1 Particulars Purpose Judgments Professional fee for civil work to Architects, Consulting Engineers etc. Disallowed For setting up, modernization, renovation and repair of factory CCE vs Convergys India Private Ltd. 2009(16) STR 198 (Tri) CCE vs Convergys India Private Ltd. 2010 (20) STR 166 (P & H) CCE vs Lupin Ltd 2012 (28)STR 291 (Tri) CCE vs Millipore India Private Ltd. 2012 (26) STR 514 (Kar)
2. Rent a cab allowed For transportation of employees from factory to residence and for business purposes i.e. meeting, recruitment etc. CCE vs Beekay Engg. & Casting Ltd. 2009 (16) STR 709 Hindustan Coca Cola Beverages Private Ltd vs CCE 2010 (19) STR 93 Dr. Reddy Lab. Ltd. vs CCE 2010(19) STR 71 CCE vs Andhra Pradesh Paper Mills Ltd. 2011 (22) STR 126 Fiamm Minda Automotive Ltd vs CCE 2011 (22)STR 210 CCE vs HEG Ltd. 2010(18) STR 446 CCE vs Stanzen Toyotetsu India (P) Ltd. 2011(923)STR 444 (Kar.) CCE vs M/s Federal Mogul Goetze (India) Ltd. 2011-TIOL-HC-P&H-ST
3. Courier allowed For the purpose of Business (dispatch of documents export papers, cheques etc.) CCE vs CCL Products (India)Ltd. 2009(16) STR 305 CCE vs Apar Industries Ltd. 2010(20) STR 624 CCE vs Apar Industries Ltd 2011(23)STR J94 CCE vs Topworth Steels Private Ltd. 2012(26)STR 420
4. Photocopy and print job allowed For the purposes of business Coca Cola India Private Ltd. 2009 (15)STR 657 (Bom) CCE vs Ultratech Cement Ltd. 2010(20)STR 577
5. Car Insurance allowed For insurance of company vehicles CCE vs CCL Products India Ltd. 2009(16)STR 305 Hindustan Coca Cola Beverages P. Ltd. vs CCE2010(19)STR 93 CCE vs DCW Ltd. 2011(22) STR 214 CCE vs Topworth Steels Pvt. Ltd. 2012(26)STR 420
6. Car Maintenance Disallowed For maintenance of company vehicles CCE vs Beekay Engg. & Casting Ltd. 2009(16)STR 709 Dr. Reddy Lab. Ltd. vs CCE 2010(19)STR 71 CCE vs CCL Products India Ltd. 2009(16)STR 305
7. ISO 14001/OMSAS 18001 certification Disallowed Attaining required efficiency of production for maintaining its quality and precision to comply with technical and other commercial aspects. Coca Cola India Private Ltd. 2009 (15) STR 657 (Bom) CCE vs Ultratech Cement Ltd. 2010 (20) STR 577
3. Inasmuch as the disputed issue are covered by the decision of various Courts, I reject the appeal filed by the Revenue and allow the appeal filed by the assessee.
4. Both the appeals are disposed of in the above manner.
(Pronounce in the open Court ) (Archana Wadhwa) Member (Judicial) Jyoti* ??
??
??
??
4