Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
Essilor Manufacturing India Pvt Ltd vs Commissioner Of Central Excise, ... on 2 September, 2016
CUSTOMS, EXCISE & SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SOUTH ZONAL BENCH BANGALORE Appeal(s) Involved: E/27988/2013-SM [Arising out of Order-in-Appeal No. 377-2013 dated 31/07/2013 passed by Commissioner of Central Excise , (Appeals-II) BANGALORE] For approval and signature: HON'BLE SHRI S.S GARG, 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? No 2 Whether it should be released under Rule 27 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982 for publication in any authoritative report or not? Yes 3 Whether Their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the Order? Seen 4 Whether Order is to be circulated to the Departmental authorities? Yes Essilor Manufacturing India Pvt Ltd Plot No.48, L&m, Kiadb Industrial Area, Unit No Ii DODDABALLAPUR - 561203 KARNATAKA Appellant(s) Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Service Tax And Customs Bangalore-ii PB 5400 CR BUIDING...QUEENS ROAD, BANGALORE, - 560001 KARNATAKA Respondent(s)
Appearance:
B.G.CHIDANANDA URS, Adv #520, AMRUTH NIVAS, 7TH MAIN, 13TH CROSS, RMV 11 STAGE, DOLLARS COLONY, BANGALORE -560094 For the Appellant Mr. Pakshi Rajan, A.R. For the Respondent Date of Hearing: 02/09/2016 Date of Decision: 02/09/2016 CORAM:
HON'BLE SHRI S.S GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER Final Order No. 20717 / 2016 Per : S.S GARG The present appeal is directed against order-in-appeal passed by Commissioner (Appeals) vide which he partially allowed the appeal of the appellant against rejection of refund vide order dated 19.03.2012 passed by Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise and allowed refund of CENVAT credit under Rule 5 of CENVAT Credit Rules and management consultancy services recruitment and training services and rejected the refund of CENVAT credit under Rule 5 of CENVAT Credit Rules on air travel agency services, cab operator, Chartered Accountant services, manpower supply service, out-door catering and professional charges.
2. Briefly the facts of the present case are that the appellant is a 100% EOU engaged in the manufacture of various types of spectacle lenses and they have filed refund of accumulated CENVAT Credit under Rule 5 of CENVAT Credit Rules 2004 for an amount of Rs 48,00,007/- for the period from January to July 2011. The adjudicating authority vide order-in-original dated 19.03.2012 allowed the refund claim of Rs 39,98,822/- and rejected the claim of refund of Rs 8,01,275/- on various input services. The appellant preferred an appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) who partially allowed the refund claim on certain services and disallowed CENVAT Credit of Rs 7,63,191/- on various services like air-travel, cab operator chartered accountant services, manpower supply service out-door catering and professional charges. Aggrieved by the said order, the appellant is before this Tribunal.
3. Heard both the parties and perused the records. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the impugned order rejecting the refund of CENVAT credit on certain services is not sustainable in law because all these services fall under the definition of input services and various courts have held them as input services and have allowed CENVAT credit/refund in respect of those services. The following table shows the case laws which held that the credit is available and consequently refund should be granted of such credit. Sl No Nature of service Case law
1. Air Travel Dr Reddys Laboratories Ltd Vs CCE [2010(19)STR 71(T)] Cadmach Machinery Co. (P) Ltd Vs CCE [2013(31)STR 33(T) Semco Electrical Pvt Ltd Vs CCE [2010(18)STR 177(T)
2. Cab operators Semco Electrical Pvt Ltd Vs CCE [2010(18)STR 177(T) CST Bangalore Vs Tanvant Technologies India Pvt Ltd [2016(43)STR 57 (Kar)]
3. Chartered Accountant Service CST Mumbai Vs MMS Maritime (India) Pvt Ltd [2016(41)STR 869(T)]
4. Manpower supply CST Mumbai Vs MMS Maritime (India) Pvt Ltd [2016(41)STR 869(T)]
5. Outdoor catering Semco Electrical Pvt Ltd Vs CCE [2010(18)STR 177(T) CST Bangalore Vs Tanvant Technologies India Pvt Ltd [2016(43)STR 57 (Kar)]
6. Professional charges CST Mumbai Vs MMS Maritime (India) Pvt Ltd [2016(41)STR 869(T)]
7. Recruitment & Training CST Bangalore Vs Tanvant Technologies India Pvt Ltd [2016(43)STR 57 (Kar)] In view of the fact that the issue is covered in favour of the appellants by the judgements cited supra, I allow the appeal of the appellant with consequential relief if any. (Order pronounced in open court) S.S GARG JUDICIAL MEMBER pnr 4