SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(CESTAT) 981

CUSTOMS EXCISE & SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL GOODS & SERVICE TAX GURUGRAM – Appellant
Versus
Eltek Sgs Pvt Ltd – Respondent
E/50690/2015



CUSTOMS, EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH REGIONAL BENCH - COURT NO. I Excise Appeal No. 50690 of 2015 [Arising out of Order-in-Original No. 13/MV/CCE/2014 dated 31.12.2014 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), Central Goods & Service Tax ,Gurgaon]

Commissioner of Central Goods and ……Appellant Service Tax, Gurgaon Plot No. 36 & 37, Sector-32, Near Medanta Hospital, Gurgaon, Haryana-122001 VERSUS M/s Eltek SGS Pvt Ltd ……Respondent Plot No. 362, Pace City-II, Sector-37, Gurgaon, Haryana-122001 APPEARANCE:

Shri Narinder Singh, Authorized Representative for the Appellant Shri Nikhil Gupta, Advocate for the Respondent WITH Excise Appeal No. 51753 of 2015 [Arising out of Order-in-Original No. 13/MV/CCE/2014 dated 31.12.2014 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), Central Goods & Service Tax ,Gurgaon]

M/s Eltek SGS Pvt Ltd ……Appellant Plot No. 362, Pace City-II, Sector-37, Gurgaon, Haryana-122001 VERSUS Commissioner of Central Goods and ……Respondent Service Tax, Gurgaon Plot No. 36 & 37, Sector-32, Near Medanta Hospital, Gurgaon, Haryana-122001 APPEARANCE:

Shri Nikhil Gupta, Advocate for the Appellant Shri Narinder Singh, Authorized Representative for the Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MR. S. S. GARG, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) HON’BLE MR. P. ANJANI KUMAR, MEMBER (TECHNICAL)

FINAL ORDER NO. 60176-60177/2026 DATE OF HEARING: 19.01.2026 DATE OF DECISION: 17.02 .2026 P.ANJANI KUMAR :

M/s ELTEK SGS Pvt Ltd are engaged in the manufacture of Rectifier Power Supply Systems and parts thereof and also in the provision of services in the category of „Maintenance and Repair Service‟ and „Erection, Commissioning and Installation Services‟ and registered for the same; the appellants have availed CENVAT Credit of service tax paid on various input services; during the course of audit of the records of the noticee for the year 2009-10 it appeared to the revenue that the appellants have availed inadmissible CENVAT Credit on 20 different input services viz. Bank Charges, CHA Services, Freight and Forwarding Services, Professional Services, Insurance Services, Taxi Services, Telephone Services, Cargo Services, Courier Services, Repair & Maintenance Services, Placement Services, Labour Services, Security Services, House Keeping services, Chartered Accountant Services, Installation and Commission Services, STQC Certification Services, Testing Services, Software Services and Job- Work Services; a show cause notice dated 10.06.2012 was issued to the appellants seeking to recover CENVAT Credit of Rs. 89,48,507 availed on the services along with interest and penalty; Commissioner vide impugned order, dated 31.12.2014, allowed the credit on 16 services but confirmed the demand, of Rs. 3,92,261, in respect of 04 services i.e. Insurance Services, Taxi Services, Courier Services and Installation and Commission Services along with interest and equal penalty. The appellants are in appeal against such confirmation vide appeal no. 51753/2015. Revenue is in appeal against dropping the demand of Rs. 77,48,221 in respect of Cargo Services vide appeal no. 50690/2015.

2. Shri Nikhil Gupta, Advocate appearing for the appellant assessee (appeal No. 51753/2015) submits as regards the revenue appeal that there is no merit in the revenue appeal; the issue is no longer res integra as the issue pertains to freight charges upto the port; Hon‟ble Himachal Pradesh high Court in the case of INOX Air product pvt ltd, (2024) 18 CENTAX 296(HP) held that where the sale price is inclusive of freight charges CENVAT Credit is admissible even after the amendment in 2011; the credit availed by the appellants, during the impugned period i.e. 2012-13, on this count actually pertain to multiple periods and was availed after a favorable decision by the Tribunal in the appellant‟s own case vide Final Order no. 96/2012 dated 15.02.2012; the credit was availed after duly informing the department vide letter dated 20.12.2012.

2.1 Learned Advocate further submits that it was incorrect on the part of t

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top