Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2013 (7) TMI AT This

  • Login
  • Cases Cited
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2013 (7) TMI 599 - AT - Central Excise


Issues:
Whether service tax paid on CHA Services for providing services at the load port qualifies as input services for Cenvat credit.

Analysis:
The judgment delivered by Ms. Archana Wadhwa addresses the issue of whether service tax paid on CHA Services for providing various services at the load port can be considered as input services for the purpose of Cenvat credit. The appellant had availed CHA Services and contended that since the goods were exported on FOB basis and they remained the owner of the goods till the port area, the expenses incurred at the port should be eligible for Cenvat credit. However, the lower authorities did not accept this argument, leading to demands being confirmed for the period 2004-2005 to November 2008 through a show cause notice issued on 23.3.09.

Upon considering both sides, Ms. Archana Wadhwa referred to previous decisions of the Tribunal to resolve the issue. Citing the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Rajkot Adani Pharmachem Pvt. Ltd., it was established that when goods are sold on FOB basis and service tax is paid for CHA Services, all services availed till the port area qualify as input services for eligible credit. Similarly, the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Rajkot Vs. Rolex Rings Pvt. Ltd. and Fiamm Minda Automotive Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Delhi-III supported the treatment of Custom House Agent services for goods exported on FOB basis as input services for Cenvat credit.

Based on the settled precedent and in line with the Tribunal's decisions, Ms. Archana Wadhwa set aside the impugned order and allowed the appeal, providing consequential relief to the appellant. The judgment was pronounced in open court on 01.07.2013.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates