Good Year India Ltd Vs Commissioner of Central Goods & Service Tax (CESTAT Chandigarh)
The Chandigarh Bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) allowed the appeals filed by Good Year India Ltd. and its Manager (Excise) against a common order confirming Cenvat credit demands of ₹1,19,66,923 and ₹26,51,768 for different periods, along with interest, equivalent penalties and a separate penalty of ₹50,000 on the Manager. The dispute related to Cenvat credit availed on Clearing and Forwarding (C&F) Agent services, rent of bungalow, brokerage charges for arranging residential accommodation, rent of office/godown, and maintenance and repair of computers and air conditioners. The Department alleged that these services had no nexus with the manufacture of dutiable goods and therefore did not qualify as input services under the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004.
The Tribunal noted that for subsequent periods, identical show cause notices based on the same audit objections had been adjudicated in favour of the appellant by the Commissioner through an Order-in-Original dated 27.07.2016, allowing Cenvat credit on all the disputed services. It further observed that the Department had accepted that order and had not filed any appeal against it. Referring to judicial precedents, the Tribunal held that the Department could not take contrary stands on the same issue for the same assessee after having accepted the subsequent order.
