Page 153 - GSTL_2nd July 2020 _Vol 38_Part 1

2020 ] ULTRA TECH CEMENT LTD. v. COMMISSIONER OF C.T., TIRUPATI 71
Credit Rules, 2004 from definition of Input Service hence ineligible for Cenvat
credit - HELD : Nature of services on which Cenvat credit availed and manner
in which such services used, relevant - Assessee obtaining input services from
internet service provider, D2H operator, etc., and further selling impugned
services to employees for consideration - Therefore, employees to be service
recipients and assessee, service providers - Amounts along with Service Tax
collected from employees, paid to exchequer and amount reflected in ST-3 re-
turns - Merely because person happens to be employee, person does not cease
to be service recipient - If employees not service recipient, no amounts ought
to have been recovered and no Service Tax ought to have been paid on same -
Conversely, assessee cannot get any exemption from payment of Service Tax
on services rendered to own employees for consideration - Assessee entitled to
Cenvat credit on disputed amounts - Rule 2(l) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. -
Nevertheless, the fact remains that there are two kinds of relationships between appellant
and their employees. First, they have a relationship as an employer and employee. As far
as this relationship is concerned, any input service which is availed to provide benefits to
their employees is excluded from Rule 2(l). Secondly, they have a relationship as a service
provider and a service recipient. As far as these services rendered with respect to this
equation are concerned, the appellant is bound to pay Service Tax on the services ren-
dered to their employees for a consideration and is entitled to avail credit on input ser-
vices on the relevant services. [para 9]
Cenvat credit - Documents for availing Cenvat credit - Revenue alleg-
ing debit notes not eligible documents under Rule 9 of Cenvat Credit Rules,
2004 - HELD : Debit notes only raised by assessee on employees to recover
amounts for services provided - No Cenvat credit availed on basis of such deb-
it notes - Demand not sustainable - Impugned order liable to be set aside -
Rule 9 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. [para 10]
Appeal allowed
CASE CITED
Wipro Ltd. v. Commissioner — 2018 (363) E.L.T. 1111 (Tribunal - LB) — Referred .................. [Paras 8, 9]
DEPARTMENTAL CLARIFICATION CITED
C.B.E. & C. Instructions F. No. 354/127/2012-TRU, dated 27-7-2012 .................................... [Paras 6, 7, 8]
REPRESENTED BY : Shri G. Prahlad, Advocate, for the Appellant.
Shri N. Bhanu Kiran, Authorized Representative, for
the Respondent.
[Order]. - This appeal is filed against Order-in-Appeal No. TTD-EXCUS-
000-APP-038-18-19, dated 30-7-2018.
2. Heard both sides and perused the records. The appellant herein is a
Public Limited Company registered with the Service Tax department for pay-
ment of Service Tax on various services. During audit of the books of account of
the appellant department noticed that they had availed and utilised Cenvat cred-
it amounting to Rs. 23,88,526/- on input services such as internet services, mobile
phone services, tata sky D2H services, employee insurance services and employ-
ee mediclaim policies which were exclusively provided for their employees at
their residential quarters. As the services are primarily procured for personal
consumption of employees, they are excluded from the definition of input ser-
vice as per clause (C) of Rule 2(l) of Cenvat Credit Rules (CCR), 2004. It was felt

GST LAW TIMES  2nd July 2020  153