2019 (5) TMI 253 - AT - Central Excise

CENVAT Credit - input services - outward freight charges - place of removal - HELD THAT - The assessee was eligible to take credit of service tax paid on the transportation of semi-finished goods from the factory up to the premises of the job-worker in terms of Board Circular No. 97/8/2007 ST dated 23.08.2007. Further the invoice issued by the assessee for dispatch of goods to the job-worker shows that the goods were Stock Transfer against Form F and the respondent have not transferred the title of the goods. Appeal dismissed - decided against Revenue.

Summary

Issues:
- Appeal against the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) allowing the appeal of the assessee and setting aside the Order-in-Original.
- Rejection of cenvat credit availed on input service for transportation of final product.
- Allegations of utilizing ineligible cenvat credit.
- Interpretation of relevant legal provisions and circulars.
- Reliance on previous decisions and their applicability.

Analysis:

The appeal before the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Bangalore pertained to the rejection of cenvat credit availed on input service for the transportation of the final product from the factory to the job worker's premises. The Revenue challenged the impugned order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) setting aside the Order-in-Original. The appellant contended that the impugned order was unsustainable in law as it failed to appreciate the facts and the law properly. The appellant argued that the outward transportation beyond the place of removal did not qualify as an 'input service' under the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, and utilizing such ineligible cenvat credit was violative of the said rules.

In response to the appellant's contentions, the Appellate Tribunal examined the submissions made by the learned AR and the material on record. The Tribunal found that the assessee was indeed eligible to take credit of service tax paid on the transportation of semi-finished goods to the job-worker's premises, as per the provisions of Board Circular No. 97/8/2007 ST dated 23.08.2007. The Tribunal also noted that the invoice issued by the assessee indicated that the goods were stock transferred against Form F, and the title of the goods was not transferred. Additionally, the Tribunal highlighted that previous decisions in favor of the assessee were relied upon, indicating a consistent interpretation of the relevant legal provisions and circulars.

Furthermore, the Tribunal addressed the Revenue's argument regarding the decision in the assessee's own case for a different period, emphasizing that the Tribunal had decided the case on its merits and found no case against the assessee. The Tribunal also considered and upheld the reliance placed on specific decisions such as Re-Western Drugs P Ltd., Re-National Tools (Exports), and CCE, Bangalore-III Vs. Triveni Engineering to support its conclusion. Ultimately, the Tribunal found no infirmity in the impugned order that warranted interference and upheld the decision by dismissing the appeal of the Revenue.

In conclusion, the Appellate Tribunal's detailed analysis focused on the eligibility of cenvat credit for transportation services, the interpretation of relevant legal provisions and circulars, and the reliance on previous decisions to support the decision to uphold the appeal of the assessee and dismiss the Revenue's appeal.