9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (4) TMI 887 - AT - Central ExciseCENVAT credit - whether appellants are entitle for the credit on input or input services mainly GTA Service Courier Service CHA C& F Service etc. used in export of goods? - Held that - This issue has come up in various cases before this Tribunal and it has been consistently held that in case of export place of removal stand extended upto the port of export therefore all the services required for export of goods are admissible input services accordingly credit is admissible for all such services - credit allowed - decided in favor of assessee.
Issues:
Whether the appellants are entitled to credit on input or input services like GTA Service, Courier Service, CHA, C&F Service used in the export of goods. Analysis: The common issue in all appeals before the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT MUMBAI was the admissibility of Cenvat credit for services utilized in the export of goods, including GTA Service, Courier Service, CHA service, and others. The appellants argued that services used up to the port of export should be considered admissible input services since the place of removal in the case of exports extends to the port of export. The appellants relied on various judgments to support their case, including cases like bang Data Forms Ltd. Vs. CCE and M/s. Hyundai Motor India Ltd. Vs. CCE. On the other hand, the Revenue representatives contended that the issue of Cenvat credit on GTA services was pending in the Hon'ble Supreme Court, citing cases like Commissioner v. ABB Ltd. and Commissioner v. Vesuvious India Ltd., indicating that the matter had not attained finality. Upon careful consideration of the submissions from both sides, the Member (Judicial) found that the issue revolved around the admissibility of Cenvat credit for services used in the export of goods. The Tribunal had consistently held that services required for the export of goods, up to the port of export, are considered admissible input services since the place of removal extends to the port of export in export cases. The Member noted that previous judgments supported the appellants' claims, and distinguished the cases cited by the Revenue representatives, stating that those cases were related to the admissibility of Cenvat credit for GTA services for home consumption, not for exports. Considering the extensive jurisprudence on the issue and the consistent rulings of various benches, the Member upheld the admissibility of credit on services used up to the port of export, following the decisions cited by the appellants. Consequently, the impugned orders were set aside, and the appeals were allowed. The judgment was pronounced in court on 17/03/2017.
|
