Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
Hwashin Automotive India Pvt Limited vs Commissioner Of Gst&Amp;Cce(Chennai ... on 12 October, 2018
IN THE CUSTOMS, EXCISE & SERVICE TAX
APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
SOUTH ZONAL BENCH, CHENNAI
Appeal No. E/40084/2018
(Arising out of Order-in-Appeal No.213/2017 (CTA-II) dated
31.8.2017 passed by the Commissioner of GST & Central Excise
(Appeals - II), Chennai)
M/s. Hwashin Automotive India Pvt. Ltd. Appellant
Vs.
Commissioner of GST & Central Excise
Chennai Outer Respondent
Appearance Ms. K. Nancy, Advocate for the Appellant Shri L. Nandakukmar, AC (AR) for the Respondent CORAM Hon'ble Ms. Sulekha Beevi C.S., Member (Judicial) Date of Hearing / Decision: 12.10.2018 Final Order No. 42629 / 2018 The appellant has filed the above appeal against the order passed by Commissioner (Appeals) who has upheld the denial of CENVAT credit availed on rent-a-cab services during the period September 2009 to March 2010.
2. Brief facts are that the appellants are manufacturers of automobile parts and accessories and are availing CENVAT credit on inputs, capital goods and input services. On verification of records, it was noticed that the appellants have 2 availed CENVAT credit on rent-a-cab services and utilized the same for payment of duty. Hence a show cause notice was issued proposing to disallow the credit of Rs.86,103/- along with interest and to impose penalties. After due process of law, the original authority disallowed the credit along with interest and imposed equal penalty under the provisions of Rule 15 of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. In appeal, Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the disallowance of credit along with interest but however set aside the penalty.
3. On behalf of the appellant Ms. K. Nancy submitted that rent-a-cab services were availed for the purpose of picking up and dropping of employees of the appellant's factory. She relied on the judgments of the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Bangalore Vs. Tata Auto Comp Systems Ltd. - 2012 (277) ELT 315 (Kar.) and that of the Hon'ble High Court of Madras in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Visteon Automotive Systems India Pvt. Ltd.
- 2017-TIOL-57-HC-MAD-CX and also the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Chennai Vs. Titan Industries Ltd. - 2018 (6) TMI 1076 - CESTAT CHENNAI in support of her argument.
4. The ld. AR Shri L. Nandakumar supported the findings in the impugned order.
5. After hearing both sides, I find that the period involved being prior to 1.4.2011, when the definition of input service had 3 a wide ambit as it included the words 'activities relating to business', appellants are eligible to avail CENVAT credit on rent- a-cab services. The issue is no longer res integra and the judgments cited by the ld. counsel for the appellant would squarely apply to all fours. The impugned order disallowing the credit on the above service is set aide and the appeal is allowed with consequential relief.
(Operative portion of the order was pronounced in open court) (Sulekha Beevi C.S.) Member (Judicial) Rex