UNIVERSAL CABLES LTD. Vs. COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is filed against the order -in -original dated 24.07.2006, vide which the adjudicating authority has disallowed the benefit of Cenvat credit in respect of services, like Internet services and courier services and consequent penalty. The denial of the Cenvat credit on these input services are on the ground that the courier services were engaged by the appellant for outward transportation of the goods and for internet services it is held that the said services were installed and availed at Head office which is situated away from the place of manufacture and credit is not available to them. Appellant is challenging only these denial of Cenvat Credit and the penalty imposed.

(2.) LEARNED advocate appearing on behalf of the appellant submits that the Cenvat credit on the courier services is wrongly denied as the said services are required for the transportation of the finished goods to the customer of the appellant. It is his submission that the definition of "Input Service" as given in Rule 2(k) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 covers the issue in their favour. It is also his submission that the services for transporting the goods to the customers place is in fact required for the clearance of the final products and hence the tax paid on such services are eligible for input stage credit. He also submitted that the credit on the internet services are also wrongly denied as the said services were used for communicating with the customers, finding solution to the problems and specifications for the customers final products etc and these were very vital for the manufacture of the final products.

(3.) LEARNED SDR, on the other hand, submits that the credit on the courier services and Internet services are correctly denied as these were not used for in or in relation to the manufacture of the final products by the appellant. It is his submission that the courier services were engaged for delivery of the final products after the completion of the manufacture of the goods and the Internet services are used in head office, which may not be linked in any way to the manufacture of the final products. He reiterates the findings of the adjudicating authority. Considered the submissions made by both sides and perused the records. As regards the denial of the input service credit on the Internet services the adjudicating authority has come to the following findings: