Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
Cce Aurangabad vs Cummins Generator Technologies India ... on 4 May, 2012
IN THE CUSTOMS, EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, WEST ZONAL BENCH AT MUMBAI
COURT NO. II
APPEAL NO. E/1038/09 Mum
Arising out of Order-in-Appeal No. AGS(139)27/09 dated 08.07.2009 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise & Customs (Appeals), Aurangabad.
For approval and signature:
Honble Shri Ashok Jindal, Member (Judicial)
1. Whether Press Reporters may be allowed to see : No
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 : Seen
of the Order?
4. Whether Order is to be circulated to the Departmental : Yes
authorities?
CCE Aurangabad
:
Appellant
Versus
Cummins Generator Technologies India Ltd.
Respondent
Appearance Shri Sachin Chitnis, Advocate for appellant Ms D.M. Durando, Dy. Commissioner (A.R.) For Respondent CORAM:
Shri Ashok Jindal, Member (Judicial) Date of Hearing : 04.05.2012 Date of Decision : 04.05.2012 ORDER NO.
Per Ashok Jindal The Revenue is in appeal against the impugned order wherein the input service credit on outdoor catering service and manpower recruitment service was allowed by the Commissioner (Appeals) in an appeal filed by the respondent.
2. The short issue involved in this matter is that whether the respondent is entitled to avail input service credit as per Rule 2(l) of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 for outdoor catering service and manpower recruitment service taken for serving food in the canteen.
3. I have gone through the show-cause notice and find that there is no allegation against the respondents as if any amount from the employees has been recovered on account of subsidized food. In the case of CCE Nagpur vs. Indoworth (I) Ltd. 2011-TIOL-682-CESTAT-MUM, this Tribunal has allowed the CENVAT credit relying on the decision of Ultratech Cement Ltd 2010 (20) STR 577(Bom.) wherein the Honble High Court has held that any service taken by the assessee which has been used in their business of manufacturing, credit on the same is available to them.
4. Therefore, following the decision of the Indoworth (I) Ltd., I do not find any infirmity in the impugned order. Accordingly, the same is upheld and the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed. (Dictated in open Court) (Ashok Jindal) Member (Judicial) nsk 3