Utilisation of cenvat credit for payment of service tax as recipient on Goods Transport Agency services is permissible [CCE & Customs vs. Panchmahal Steel Ltd. (2015) 37 STR 965 (Guj.) see also Union of India vs. Mohini Industries, (2015) 37 STR 979 (Chhattisgarh)].
The Transit Insurance of induction furnace and transformer is used indirectly in relation to the manufacture of the final products and accordingly cenvat credit thereon would be admissible [UOI vs. Raipur Rototcast Ltd. (2015) 37 STR 978].
Credit of service tax paid on following services is admissible since connected to business of manufacture –
Rent-a-Cab services used for providing transportation facility to customers;
Air travel service availed for business travel of partners and employees; and
Rent of office premises
[Nash Industries vs. CST (2015) 37 STR 1060 (Tri.–Bang.)].
Cenvat credit of service tax paid on manpower recruitment or supply agency services availed in respect of –
Personnel employed for maintaining the occupational health centre at the factory which was required to be maintained mandatorily under the Factories Act is admissible as it being activities related to manufacture of final product.
Personnel recruited for project office and corporate office is admissible since it being activities related to business.
[Binani Cement Ltd. vs. CCE (2015) 37 STR 1071 (Tri.–Del.)].
Credit of service tax paid on consulting engineering services availed for construction of railway sidings which were used for transportation of coal for the captive power plant in the factory is admissible since –
The said services would be covered under the expression ‘services in relation to procurement of inputs’; and
It being an activity relating to the manufacturing business of assessee
[RSWM Ltd. vs. CCE (2015) 37 STR 1074 (Tri.–Del.)].
Where the assessee a manufacturer and a provider of port services had availed cenvat credit on port services availed by it during the period October 2003 to September 2004 and utilised the same for discharging its excise duty liability post September, 2004, it was held that the same was permissible since –
Rule 3 of the Service Tax Credit Rules permitted taking of cenvat credit on input services falling within the same category of output services; and
Rule 11 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 permitted utilization of unutilised balance of service tax credit availed under the Service Tax Credit Rules, 2002 for payment of duty liablity under the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004
[Welspun Maxsteel Ltd. vs. CCE (2015) 37 STR 1081 (Tri.–Mumbai)].
Where cenvat credit availed by the assessee was sought to be disallowed only on the ground that the document/ invoices based on which credit was taken did not contain the registration number of service providers, the Tribunal held the same to be a curable minor clerical error and accordingly allowed availment of credit on the same [Soham Motors Pvt. Ltd. vs. CCE (2015) 37 STR 1086 (Tri.–Mumbai)].
(i) Credit of service tax paid on marine insurance services received in the course of exports of goods is admissible;
(ii) Where all the particulars [including service tax Registration No. and amount of service tax] required to be mentioned u/r. 9(2) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 were available on the insurance policy, the Tribunal held that credit can be taken on the same
[Gobind Sugar Mills Ltd. vs. CCE&ST (2015) 39 STR 68 (Tri.–Del.)].
Credit of service tax paid on setting up of factory premises would be admissible [Liugong India Pvt. Ltd. vs. CCE (2015) 38 STR 96 (Tri.–Del.)].
Where the assessee was engaged in providing the output service of commercial training and coaching, credit of service tax paid on brokerage for finding accommodation for faculties was admissible since provision of training services was not possible without availability of faculty [Tata Management Training Centre (2015) 38 STR 157 (Tri.–Mumbai)].
