Order date – 18 November 2022

 Facts –

• The Appellant, M/s TDK India Private Limited, is engaged in the manufacture of soft ferrite parts/components falling under Tariff Heading No.85051110 of the First Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985.
• Show-cause notice dated was issued to the Appellant alleging wrong availment and utilization of cenvat credit on Air Travel Agency Service, Works Contract Service and Construction Service etc.
• Being aggrieved appellant had filed an appeal

Issue –

• Whether the availment and utilization of cenvat credit on Air Travel Agency Service, Works Contract Service and Construction Service etc.?

Order –

• The Tribunal finds that if the Travels were for personal purpose or consumption of an employee, it would not be provided by the Appellant Company and will not be debited to their Books of Accounts. Unless and until, the Travel is for business exigencies, the Company would not include the expenditure and debit the same in the Books of Accounts.
• Regarding “Works Contract Service it find that this Notification No.30/2012-ST, is applicable to individual/partnership firm and Hindu Undivided Family (HUF). It is not applicable to corporate assessee. The Appellant herein is a Private Limited Company and the services are supplied by Private Limited Company. Accordingly, this Notification is not applicable to the present case.
• Notification No.26/2012-ST dated 01.07.2012 for valuation of service and abatement is also not applicable to the facts of the present case. Therefore, the credit disallowed under the “Works Contract Service” cannot be sustained and the same is set aside. Regarding, commercial and construction service it was submitted that the payments were made within the normal period and therefore, the credit is rightly availed. Accordingly, the disallowance on this count is set aside.
• The Tribunal also relied on the decision in the cases of Arkema Paroxides India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CCEx., Pondicherry : 2016- TIOL-1353-CESTAT-MAD, it was held that regarding Air Travel Service, it is submitted that when it is not in dispute that the said services were used only for the Company’s Executives to travel to achieve the business objective and has not been used for employees’ personal necessity, the credit of service tax paid on such services, cannot be denied.
• Hence the appeal is allowed.