Case Law Details

Case Name : Commissioner Of Central Excise Vs Indoworth (I) Ltd. (CESTAT Mumbai)
Appeal Number : Appeal No. ST/334 & 335/2009
Date of Judgement/Order : 05/04/2011
Related Assessment Year :
Courts : All CESTAT (655) CESTAT Mumbai (129)

This issue has been already settled by Hon’ble High Court of Bombay in the case of CCE vs. Ultratech Cement Ltd. reported in 2010 (260) ELT 369  wherein the Hon’ble High Court of Bombay has held that input service credit availed by the assessee on outdoor catering is available subject to that the assessee does not charge anything from the employees (in case the cost of food supplied to the worker forms part of the assessable value.) As there is no allegation against the respondent that they have recovered any amount from the employees, therefore, following the decision of Ultratech Cement (supra), I do not find any merits in the appeals of the revenue. Therefore, impugned orders are upheld. Revenue’s appeals are rejected.

IN THE CUSTOMS, EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
WEST ZONAL BENCH, MUMBAI

Appeal No. ST/334 & 335/2009

Arising out Order-in-Appeal No.SR/215 & 216/NGP/2009 Dated: 24.9.2009
Passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Nagpur

Date of Decision: 5.4.2011

COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, NAGPUR

Vs

INDOWORTH (I) LTD

Appellant Rep by: Shri S M Vaidya, JDR
Respondent Rep by: Shri Mayur Shroff, Adv.

CORAM: Ashok Jindal, Member (J)

ORDER NO.A/146-147/2011/SMB/C-IV

Per: Ashok Jindal:

Revenue is in appeal against the impugned orders wherein input service credit on outdoor catering service was allowed by the lower appellate authority.

2. As per the show-cause notices, it is alleged against the respondent that they are providing outdoor catering service which is welfare activity. Therefore, input service credit availed by the respondent is not available on outdoor catering services. Therefore, both the authorities following the decision of GTC Industries Ltd. 2010 (20) STR J14 1 dropped the demand and allowed input service credit availed by the respondent. Aggrieved from the said orders, revenue is in appeal.

3. Heard both sides.

4. After hearing both sides, I find that this issue has been already settled by Hon’ble High Court of Bombay in the case of CCE vs. Ultra tech Cement Ltd. reported in 2010 (260) ELT 369  wherein the Hon’ble High Court of Bombay has held that input service credit availed by the assessee on outdoor catering is available subject to that the assessee does not charge anything from the employees (in case the cost of food supplied to the worker forms part of the asses sable value.) As there is no allegation against the respondent that they have recovered any amount from the employees, therefore, following the decision of Ultratech Cement (supra), I do not find any merits in the appeals of the revenue. Therefore, impugned orders are upheld. Revenue’s appeals are rejected.

(Dictated in Court)

More Under Service Tax

Posted Under

Category : Service Tax (3328)
Type : Judiciary (10917)
Tags : Cestat judgments (844)

Leave a Reply

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