NU Vista Limited Vs Commissioner of Service Tax (CESTAT Kolkata)
CESTAT Kolkata allowed the appeal filed by NU Vista Limited (formerly Emami Cement Limited) against an order confirming Service Tax demands, interest and penalty.
The appellant had received various taxable services in connection with setting up its cement plant and availed CENVAT credit. The services included banking and financial services, management, maintenance and repair, rent-a-cab, GTA, legal consultancy, erection, commissioning and installation services. The Department denied credit of ₹57,68,603 on the ground that the expression “setting up” had been removed from the definition of “input service” with effect from 1 April 2011.
The appellant contended that it had not availed credit on civil works used for construction of the cement plant, but only on services otherwise covered under Rule 2(l) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. It relied upon the Tribunal’s decision in Bharat Coking Coal Ltd. on the eligibility of CENVAT credit for services used in setting up a factory.
CESTAT observed that the appellant had availed credit only on services such as banking and financial services, management, maintenance and repair, rent-a-cab, GTA, legal consultancy, and erection, commissioning and installation services, which were “input services” under Rule 2(l). The Tribunal therefore held that denial of credit merely because the services were used in setting up the cement plant was not sustainable.
