Order Date – 12 June 2023

Parties: The Commissioner of Service Tax Vs M/s. Saipem India Projects Limited

Facts – 

• The Respondent, M/s. Saipem India Projects Limited, engaged in providing engineering and allied services in relation to projects in oil and gas, petrochemicals and refineries, both domestic and international. 
• They filed three refund claims for the period from July 2009 to March 2010. The refund was initially rejected on the ground that invoices are issued prior to centralized registration, Refund rejected in respect of certain services as the same are not eligible input services.
• The lower appellate authority sanctioned the refund. Being aggrieved the department filed this appeal.

Issue – 

• Whether the refund was rightly sanctioned by the lower appellate authority?

Order – 

• The Tribunal observed that the issue is relating to refund of CENVAT Credit accumulated prior to centralized registration, the decision in the case of M/s. mPortal India Wireless Solutions P. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Service Tax, Bangalore [2012 (27) S.T.R. 134 (Kar.)] is equally applicable to the facts of this case. Whether it be registration or centralized registration, when there is no mandatory provision in the Rules regarding registration, the CENVAT Credit cannot be denied.
• The definition of ‘input service’ is inclusive and as long as it is used in or in relation to the business, the assessee is eligible for taking the credit. The Hon’ble Apex Court in the decision rendered in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Nagpur v. M/s. Ultratech Cement Ltd. [2010 (20) S.T.R. 577 (Bom.)] has held that accordingly, we hold that all services used in relation to the business of manufacturing the final product are covered under the definition of ‘input service’.
• Thus, appeals filed by the Revenue are rejected.