2019 (4) TMI 118 - AT - Central Excise

CENVAT Credit - input services - outward transportation of goods upto the buyer s premises - Held that - There is not much discussion in the orders passed by the authorities below as to which is the place of removal. It is also stated that the appellants have not furnished necessary documents to prove that the sale is on F.O.R. basis. Though, counsel for the appellant has produced the documents now to show that the sale is on F.O.R. basis, it is best that the matter be remanded for the purpose of verification of these documents - appeal allowed by way of remand.

Summary

Issues: Denial of Cenvat credit on outward transportation of goods up to buyer's premises.

Analysis:
The issue in this appeal revolves around the denial of Cenvat credit on outward transportation of goods up to the buyer's premises. The appellant argued that the sale of goods is on F.O.R. basis, and as per a Board circular referencing relevant court decisions, the place of removal is at the buyer's premises. The appellant cited previous decisions from the Tribunal at Ahmedabad to support the eligibility of credit on GTA services up to the buyer's premises when the sale is on F.O.R. basis. On the other hand, the Revenue's representative emphasized the lack of produced documents to establish the sale terms and the place of removal. The Tribunal noted that previous decisions remanded similar cases to determine the place of removal before deciding on credit eligibility, citing the Board circular and decisions from the Ahmedabad Bench. It was observed that there was insufficient discussion on the place of removal in the lower authorities' orders, and the appellant had now provided documents to support the F.O.R. basis of the sale. However, to ensure verification of these documents, the matter was remanded to the adjudicating authority for a fresh determination. The Tribunal directed the adjudicating authority to consider the Board's Circular, the Ahmedabad Bench decisions, and verify the place of removal. If the buyer's premises are confirmed as the place of removal, the appellant would be eligible for credit on outward transportation of goods. Therefore, the appeal was allowed for remand for further adjudication.