9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (10) TMI 523 - AT - Central ExciseCENVAT credit - input services used for export of services - CFS Dock Expenses - C&F Agent Service - THC charges (Export) - freight outward(Export) - banking service - denial on the ground that these services were rendered beyond the place of removal i.e. factory gate - Held that - In case of the export of the goods, the ownership of goods remained with exporter till it reaches to the foreign port of delivery, therefore, any service which is used before the delivery of goods or foreign port is admissible for Cenvat Credit, therefore, all these services rendered for export of goods is upto the place of removal. This Tribunal in various judgment held that in case of export of goods, place of removal stand extended from factory gate to port of export, therefore, all the services in question which was admittedly used for export of goods are indeed input services and credit is admissible. Credit allowed - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
Issues Involved:
Whether the appellant is entitled to Cenvat Credit on services used for export of goods beyond the factory gate. Analysis: The issue in this case revolves around the entitlement of the appellant to claim Cenvat Credit on various services utilized for the export of goods beyond the factory gate. The lower authorities had denied the credit on the grounds that the services were rendered beyond the place of removal, which is the factory gate. The appellant contended that as per a Board Circular, in cases of export of goods, the place of removal extends to the port of export, where the goods are handed over to the shipping line. The appellant argued that since the services were used before the delivery of goods at the foreign port, they are admissible for Cenvat Credit. The appellant relied on previous judgments to support their case. The appellant's representative, a Chartered Accountant, highlighted the clarification provided in Circular No. 999/6/2015-CX, emphasizing that the ownership of goods remains with the exporter until the goods reach the foreign port of delivery. Therefore, services used before the goods reach the foreign port should be considered admissible for Cenvat Credit. The representative further pointed out that the services in question were utilized only up to the Indian port based on the export invoice and documents, where the price was CIF (Cost, Insurance, and Freight) up to the foreign port of delivery. The appellant's argument was supported by references to specific judgments such as M/s. Bhushan Steel Ltd. Vs. C.C.E, Raigad-2018 and others. On the other hand, the Additional Commissioner representing the Revenue reiterated the findings of the impugned order, which denied the Cenvat Credit to the appellant. However, after considering the submissions from both sides and examining the facts of the case, the Member (Judicial) concluded that the services in question were indeed used for the export of goods cleared from the factory. Given that the ownership of goods remains with the exporter until the goods reach the foreign port of delivery, the services used before this point are eligible for Cenvat Credit. The Member (Judicial) referred to various judgments supporting the extension of the place of removal from the factory gate to the port of export in cases of export of goods. Consequently, the impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed in favor of the appellant. In conclusion, the judgment by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT AHMEDABAD ruled in favor of the appellant, allowing them to claim Cenvat Credit on the services used for the export of goods beyond the factory gate. The decision was based on the interpretation of the place of removal in cases of export, supported by relevant legal provisions, circulars, and precedents.
|
