Appeal against the Tribunal's order allowing input credit on outdoor catering services. Court held credit valid for period before March 2011 and dismissed appeal.
Civil miscellaneous appeal dismissed; questions of law answered against the Revenue.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
In the High Court of Judicature at Madras
Dated : 11.2.2016
Coram :
The Honourable Mr.Justice V.RAMASUBRAMANIAN
and
The Honourable Mr.Justice N.KIRUBAKARAN
Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No.157 of 2016
The Commissioner of Central Excise, Chennai III Commissionerate, Chennai-34. ...Appellant/Respondent
Vs
1.M/s.Bharath Heavy Electricals Ltd., Boiler Auxillaries Plant,
Ranipet, Vellore.
2.The Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai-6. ...Respondents/Appellant /Second Respondent
APPEAL under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944 against the order dated 9.7.2015 made in Final Order No.40770/2015 on the file of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, South Zonal Bench, Chennai.
JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED BY V.RAMASUBRAMANIAN,J
The Revenue has come up with the above appeal under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944 questioning the correctness of the order of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal.
"(i) Whether the Tribunal was corect in holding that the assessee is entitled to avail the CENVAT credit on 'outdoor catering services' provided to the employees of the factory as an input service credit and allowing the assessee's appeal despite the fact that outdoor catering service does not fall under the ambit of the definition of 'input service' specified under Rule 2(1) of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 and in as much as the catering services are neither used in or in relation to the manufacture or clearance of final product nor can it be said to be an activity relating to business ?
(ii) Whether the Tribunal's decisiion was correct in holding that the outdoor catering service is an eligible input service in spite of specific ruling of the High Court, Kolkata Bench in the case of M/s.Pieco Electronics & Electricals Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax IV, Kolkatta [Appeal No.353 of 2004] [reported in 2001 ITR 477] that even if a factory has to maintain a canteen, it cannot be said that it is an integral part of manufacture or production carried on by the assessee? and
(iii) Whether the order passed by the Tribunal in F.O.No.40770/2015 dated 9.7.2015
is correct in the absence of any finding and discussion?"
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar(CS VI)
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
To
1.The Customs,
Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal,
Haddows Road,
Chennai-6.
2.The Commissioner of Central Excise,
Chennai III Commissionerate,
26/1, Mahatma Gandhi Salai,
Nungambakkam,
Chennai-34.
+1cc to Mr.T.Chandrasekaran, Advocate Sr.9002
CMA.No.157 of 2016
skv(CO)
srg(16/03/2016)
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the Tribunal was correct in holding that the assessee is entitled to avail CENVAT credit on outdoor catering services provided to employees.
Whether outdoor catering service is an eligible input service despite a specific ruling of the High Court, Kolkata Bench.
Whether the Tribunal's order is correct in the absence of any finding and discussion.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
M/s. Pieco Electronics & Electricals Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax IV, KolkattaDistinguished¶22
M/s.Pieco Electronics & Electricals Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax IV, Kolkatta [Appeal No.353 of 2004] [reported in 2001 ITR 477]
Commissioner of Central Excise. Vs. Ultratech Cement LimitedRelied on¶7
C.C.E. Vs. Ultratech Cement Limited [(2010) TIOL 745]
Maruti Suzuki Limited Vs. C.C.E.Relied on¶7
Maruti Suzuki Limited Vs. C.C.E. [(2009) 240 ELT 641]
4 provisions across 2 enactments
Commissioner of Central Excise, Chennai III Commissionerate
M/s. Bharath Heavy Electricals Ltd.
V. Ramasubramanian
N. Kirubakaran
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
