Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
Unique Chemicals vs Vadodara-Ii on 23 September, 2019
Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal
West Zonal Bench At Ahmedabad
REGIONAL BENCH- COURT NO.3
Excise Appeal No.13114 of 2018
(Arising out of OIA-VAD-EXCUS-002-APP-426-2018-19 passed by Commissioner (Appeals)
Commissioner of Central Excise, Customs and Service Tax-VADODARA-I)
M/s. Unique Chemicals ........Appellant
(A Division Of J B Chemicals & Pharmaceuticals Ltd),
Plot No. 5, Gidc, Panoli, Ta-Ankleshwar,
Bharuch, Gujarat. VERSUS
C.C.E. & S.T., Vadodra-ii .......Respondent
1ST FLOOR... ROOM NO.101, NEW CENTRAL EXCISE BUILDING, VADODARA, GUJARAT-390023 APPEARANCE:
Sh. Yogesh B. Desai Advocate for the Appellant Sh. Govind Jha, Authorised representative for the Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MEMBER (JUDICIAL), MR. RAMESH NAIR Final Order No. A/ 11816 /2019 DATE OF HEARING: 23.09.2019 DATE OF DECISION:23.09.2019 RAMESH NAIR The issue involved is admissibility of the Cenvat Credit in respect of services namely Mandap Keeper Service and Hotel Accommodation Service.
2. Shri Yogesh B. Desai Ld. Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant submits that the Hotel Accommodation Service is used for lodging of the employee of the company for the business purpose. The Mandap Keeper Service is used for organising the business conference. Therefore, both the services are used for directly the purpose of business of the appellant company. He placed reliance on following judgment.
Unique Pharmaceuticals Laboratories Vs. C.C.E & S.T., - Vadodara-II - 2018 (12) TMI 726 - CESTAT Ahmedabad Unique Pharmaceuticals Laboratories Vs. C.C.E & S.T., - Vadodara-II - 2018 (12) TMI 1099 - CESTAT Ahmedabad Shree Digvijay Cement Company Ltd Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise and Service Tax - Rajkot - 2019-TIOL-2075-CESTAT-AHM Bhimashankar SSK Ltd Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Pune-I-
2018-TIOL-2070-CESTAT-MUM
2|Page E/13114/2018 Warburg Pincus India Pvvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Service Tax, Mumbai - 2018 (364) E.L.T. 159 (Tri. - Mumbai) Indian Oil Corporation Ltd Vs. C.C.E. & S.T. - Vadodra-I-Order No. A/13078/2017 dated 06.10.2017 Deloitte Haskins & Sells Vs. C.C.E. & S. Tax, Vadodra I- Final Order No. A/12886/2017 dated 10.10.2017 Indian Oil Corporation Ltd Vs. C.C.E. & S.T., Vadodra II Final Order No. A/12913 - 12914/2017 dated 10.10.2017 Maharashtra Seamless Ltd Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Raigad
- 2016-TIOL-974-CESTAT-MUM Reliance Industries Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise & Service Tax, LTU, Mumbai - 2016-TIOL-2392- CESTAT-MUM Parason Machinery India Pvt Ltd Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Aurangabad - 2017-TIOL-4003- CESTAT-MUM Transpek Industry Ltd Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise and Service Tax Vadodra - I- 2018 - TIOL - 2235 - CESTAT - AHM
3. Shri Govind Jha Ld. Superintendent, (AR) appearing on behalf of the Revenue reiterates the finding of the impugned order. He placed reliance on the following judgment.
Wipro LTD. Vs. Commissioner Of Central Excise, Banglore-III 2018 (363) E.L.T. 1111 (Tri.-LB) Empire Industries Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex., Mumbai-III 2018 (15) G.S.T.L. 274 (Tri.-Mumbai)
4. I have heard both the sides and perused the records. I find that there is no dispute, that the Hotel Accommodation Service was used by the appellant for hotel stay of staff of the appellants who travelled outside for business purpose. As regard Mandap Keeper service, the same is used for arranging the business conference which is a necessity for running the business. Therefore, both the services are directly used for conducting the business of the appellant. The expenditure expenses of these services are borne by appellant and booked in their books of account. The admissibility of the Cenvat Credit on the aforesaid services have been considered by this Tribunal in the case of appellant's sister unit i.e. Unique Pharmaceuticals Laboratories Vs. C.C.E. & S.T. - Vadodra-II, Unique Pharmaceuticals Laboratories Vs. C.C.E. & S.T. - Vadodra-II (Supra) wherein the Cenvat Credit on Mandap Keeper Service was allowed.
5. As regard the Hotel Stay, this Tribunal in the case of M/s. Shree DIGVIJAY CEMENT COMPANY LTD (supra) allowed the Cenvat Credit.
3|Page E/13114/2018 Moreover, there are number of Judgments cited by the appellant which supports their case, therefore, in my considered view, the Cenvat Credit on Hotel Accommodation and Mandap Keeper service is admissible.
6. As regard the judgments cited by the Ld. AR, I find that both the decision is in respect of Outdoor catering services which was primarily for personal use or consumption by individuals, the same fact does not exist in the present case. Therefore, the ratio of those judgments are not relevant.
7. Accordingly the impugned order is set-aside the appeal is allowed.
(Dictated & Pronounced in the open court) (RAMESH NAIR) MEMBER (JUDICIAL) Kamakshi