Facts: M/s Morgan Stanley India Financial Services Pvt. Ltd. (“the appellant”) is engaged in providing financial advisory services to overseas clients which includes assistance in monitoring and providing updates about the performances made by the overseas clients. Assessee filed an appeal against Revenue’s order rejecting the CENVAT credit claimed for “General Insurance Services”, “Air Travel Agent Services”, “Banking & Financial Services”, “Storage and Warehousing Services” and "Business Auxiliary Services" on the ground that there was no nexus between input and output services.
Appellant’s Interpretation of Law: The appellant contended that the Commissioner had erred in rejecting the refund claim filed under Rule 5 of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 read with Notification No. 27/2012-CE (NT) dated June 18, 2012 as the same has been allowed by the learned Commissioner in case of appellant’s group entity Morgan Stanley Advantage Services Pvt. Ltd.
The Hon’ble CESTAT of Mumbai Bench vide its order no. A/85196-85197/2019 dated January 25, 2019 extends the CENVAT Credit to appellant on General Insurance, Air Travel Agent, Storage and Warehousing, Banking & Financial Services, and Business Auxiliary Services (BAS), which holds that said input services are used in course of providing output service and are essential for the appellant’s business. Therefore, CESTAT held that it was clear that the assessee had followed the calculation as prescribed by Notification No. 27/2012 and Rule 5 and had rightly claimed the refund of the lowest amount for relevant quarters. Stating that there is no question of excess credit availed by the assessee, CESTAT held that the assessee was entitled for the excess refund claim.
Citation: [ TS-50-CESTAT-2019-ST ]