Order Date – 15 February 2023

Parties: Delhi Metro Rail Corporation Ltd. Vs Principal Commissioner, Service Tax, Delhi-I

Facts –

• The Appellant, Delhi Metro Rail Corporation Ltd, is having centralised registration with the Service tax department for the services-consulting engineering service, management maintenance & repair service, sale of space on time slot for advertisement service, renting of immovable property service, business auxiliary service and works contract service.
• During the audit for the period 2006-2009 it was found that the appellant have wrongly availed Cenvat credit of Service tax on input service-consulting engineering service during April, 2004 to August, 2007, as the appellant was providing exempt service of Transport of passengers and have wrongly availed Cenvat credit on the invoices which are addressed to other offices of the appellant and not their registered office.

Issue –

• Whether the appellant had wrongly availed Cenvat credit of service tax?

Order –

• The Tribunal observed that once credit have been rightly taken, there is no restriction in use of such credit for payment of either central excise duty or service tax or any other specified tax liability. 
• Further Rule 6(5) of CCR provides that the provisions of Rule 6(1), (2) and (3) are not applicable, where input service received is used both for providing taxable and tax-free output service. The appellant has utilised the input consultancy engineering service both for providing tax free output service of passenger transport and taxable output service of consultancy engineering service. Hence, the Tribunal set aside the demand of disallowance of Cenvat credit.
• It was also held that the condition of being registered is not essential for taking Cenvat credit, as have been held by Hon’ble Karnatka High Court in mPortal India Wireless Solutions Pvt Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Service Tax, Bangalore, [2011 (9) TMI 450- Karnataka High Court].
• Hence the impugned order is set aside and the appeal is allowed.