Case Law Details

Case Name : Moneygram India P. Ltd. Vs Assistant Commissioner (CESTAT Mumbai)
Appeal Number : Service Tax No. 89141 of 2018
Date of Judgement/Order : 28/01/2020
Related Assessment Year :
Courts : All CESTAT (990) CESTAT Mumbai (193)

Moneygram India P. Ltd. Vs Assistant Commissioner (CESTAT Mumbai)

Issue under consideration is that whether the Appellants are entitled to avail CENVAT Credit on the input service viz. event management service?

The learned Advocate for the Appellant submits that events are organized by the Appellant company for promoting their brand value and thus having direct nexus with the output service provided by the Appellant. 

CESTAT find that a similar issue has been considered by the Division Bench of this Tribunal in Honda Motorcycle & Scooter (I) Pvt. Ltd’s case. It is not in dispute that event management service has been used by the Appellant for promoting their brand value as recorded by both the authorities below in the respective orders. Thus, following the aforesaid judgment, CESTAT do not find merit in the impugned order.

Consequently, the same are set aside and the appeals are allowed.

FULL TEXT OF THE CESTAT JUDGEMENT

Heard both sides.

2. These appeals are filed against Order-in-Appeal No.NA/GST & CX/A-III/MUM/434-435/17-18, dt. 27.02.2018, passed by the Commissioner (Appeals-III), CGST & CX, Mumbai.

3. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the Appellants are engaged in providing taxable services which are mainly exported out of India. They filed cash refund claims of accumulated CENVAT Credit under Rule 5 of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. In the impugned order, the learned Commissioner (Appeals) has allowed cash refund of accumulated CENVAT Credit on various input services except
event management service, which in the opinion of learned Commissioner (Appeals), not admissible, being having no nexus with the output service.

4. The learned Advocate for the Appellant submits that events are organized by the Appellant company for promoting their brand value and thus having direct nexus with the output service provided by the Appellant. In support, he has referred to the judgment of this Tribunal in the case of Honda Motorcycle & Scooter (I) Pvt. Ltd Vs CCE Delhi-III – 2016 (45) STR 397 (Tri-Chand.)

5. The learned A.R. for the Revenue reiterates the findings of the  learned Commissioner (Appeals).

6. I have carefully considered the submissions advanced by both sides and perused the records. The short issue involved in the present appeals is whether the Appellants are entitled to avail CENVAT Credit on the input service viz. event management service. I find that a similar issue has been considered by the Division Bench of this Tribunal in Honda Motorcycle & Scooter (I) Pvt. Ltd’s case. It is not in dispute that event management service has been used by the Appellant for promoting their brand value as recorded by both the authorities below in the respective orders. Thus, following the aforesaid judgment, I do not find merit in the impugned order.

7. Consequently, the same are set aside and the appeals are allowed with consequential relief, if any, as per law.

Download Judgment/Order

More Under Service Tax

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Search Posts by Date

September 2020
M T W T F S S
 123456
78910111213
14151617181920
21222324252627
282930