2012 (11) TMI 698 - AT - Service Tax

Canvat credit of the service tax paid on courier service samples to the customers through courier alleged that appellant did not produce the documentary evidence to show that the ownership remained with him till the goods were delivered at the premises of the customer and the courier charges were part of the price charged for the goods Held that - Appellant has all the necessary documents and want an opportunity to produce the same - matter remanded back to the original adjudicating authority to consider the documents to be submitted by the appellant in this regard

Summary

Issues:
1. Denial of Cenvat credit on courier service tax paid by M/s.Grindwell Norton Ltd.
2. Lack of documentary evidence to prove ownership of goods and inclusion of courier charges in the price.

Analysis:
1. The appeal and stay application challenged the order-in-appeal passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Mumbai, denying Cenvat credit to M/s.Grindwell Norton Ltd. The denial was based on the lack of proof that courier charges were part of the price charged and that the ownership of goods remained with the appellant until delivery at the customer's premises.

2. The appellant contended that they had sufficient documentary evidence, such as invoices and purchase orders, demonstrating that courier charges were indeed included in the price paid by customers, and that ownership of goods was retained by the appellant until delivery. The appellant requested a remand to present these documents before the original adjudicating authority for consideration.

3. The Technical Member, after considering the submissions, noted that the core issue revolved around the absence of documentary evidence regarding ownership and inclusion of courier charges in the price. Given that the appellant possessed the necessary documents and sought an opportunity to submit them, the matter was remanded to the original adjudicating authority for a reevaluation.

4. The remand directed the authority to review the documents provided by the appellant, allowing for a fair hearing before making a final determination on the eligibility of Cenvat credit. The appellant was granted the chance to present all relevant documents, emphasizing the importance of due process in reaching a decision. Consequently, the appeal was allowed by remand, and the stay application was disposed of accordingly.