9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2021 (5) TMI 25 - AT - Central ExciseCENVAT Credit - input services - GTA services availed for transportation of goods from the factory to the customer s premises - HELD THAT - The issue stands covered by the decision of the Tribunal in the appellant s own case M/S. MRF LTD. VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF GST CE, TIRUCHIRAPALLI 2019 (11) TMI 1607 - CESTAT CHENNAI . Further, in page 8 of the impugned orders, the Commissioner (Appeals) has noted that appellants have included the freight charges in the assessable value and discharged excise duty on the same. In such circumstances, the appellants would be eligible to avail credit of the service tax paid on such freight charges for outward transportation of goods upto the buyer s premises. Credit allowed - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
Issues:
Whether the service tax paid on GTA services for transportation of goods is eligible for cenvat credit. Analysis: The issue in these appeals revolved around the eligibility of cenvat credit for service tax paid on GTA services used for transporting goods. The appellant's counsel referenced a previous decision in favor of the appellants, which had been amended subsequently. The Ld. A.R supported the impugned orders. After reviewing the records and hearing both sides, the Member (Judicial) noted that the issue had already been settled in the appellant's favor by a previous Tribunal decision. Additionally, the Commissioner (Appeals) observed that the appellants had included freight charges in the assessable value and paid excise duty on them. Consequently, the appellants were deemed eligible to claim credit for the service tax paid on such freight charges for outward transportation of goods to the buyer's premises. The Member (Judicial) referenced a relevant case decided by the Division Bench of the Tribunal at Ahmedabad and highlighted that the decision had been upheld by the High Court of Gujarat. Following these precedents, the Member (Judicial) concluded that the demand could not be sustained. Consequently, the impugned orders were set aside, and the appeals were allowed with any consequential relief as per the law.
|
