2021 (10) TMI 380 - AT - Central Excise

CENVAT Credit - input services - C F Services received by the appellant for the sale of their goods - place of removal - HELD THAT - Where the sale of goods is taken place through C F Agent, the premises of the same C F Agent is the place of removal in terms of definition of place of removal provided in Section(4)(3)(c)(iii) of Central Excise Act, 1944. As per the definition of Place of Removal, the C F Agents premises clearly falls under sub-clause (iii) of clause of Section 4(3) of Central Excise Act, 1944 is a place of removal. As per Rule 2(l) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 services for clearance of goods up to the place of removal is an admissible input service - Since in the present case goods are cleared from the factory of the appellant and sold through C F Agent, all the services even from factory gate up to the C F Agent are used up to the place of removal therefore, the C F Agent service is admissible input service. As regard the judgment of Hon ble Gujarat High Court in the case of COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, AHMEDABAD II VERSUS M/S CADILA HEALTH CARE LTD. 2013 (1) TMI 304 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT relied upon by the learned Authorized Representative it was categorically held that clearing and forwarding agent service provided by the agents of the principle manufacture of goods and any goods stored by them after clearance from the factory stored on behalf of the principle only the place of removal under Section(4)(3)(c)(iii) of Central Excise Act, 1944, it was held that the service of C F Agent is within ambit of Rule 2(l) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 - Even the said judgment of Hon ble Gujarat High Court supports the case of the assessee. The appellant is entitled for the Cenvat Credit in respect of C F Agent Service - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.

Summary

Issues:
Whether the appellant is entitled to Cenvat Credit for C & F services received for the sale of goods.

Analysis:
The judgment delivered by Hon'ble Member (Judicial) Mr. Ramesh Nair at the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Ahmedabad addresses the issue of Cenvat Credit eligibility for C & F services utilized in the sale of goods. The appellant did not appear for the hearing, prompting the final disposal of the appeal due to repeated listings. The Authorized Representative for the revenue cited relevant judgments, including Commissioner of Central Excise and S.T. v/s. Ultra Tech Cement Ltd. and Commissioner of C.Ex., Ahmedabad-II v/s. Cadila Healthcare Ltd. The Member considered the submissions and records, focusing on whether the appellant is entitled to Cenvat Credit for clearing and forwarding services related to their goods' sale. The definition of 'place of removal' under Section 4(3)(c)(iii) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 was crucial, stating that the C & F Agent's premises qualify as a place of removal. Rule 2(l) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 deems services up to the place of removal as admissible input services. Since goods are cleared from the factory and sold through the C & F Agent, all services up to the C & F Agent are considered up to the place of removal, making the C & F Agent service admissible. The judgment in Ultra Tech Cement Ltd. supported the appellant, emphasizing the admissibility of services used up to the place of removal. Similarly, the judgment in Cadila Healthcare Ltd. affirmed that C & F Agent services fall within the ambit of Rule 2(l) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, further supporting the appellant's case.

Based on the analysis, the Member concluded that the appellant is entitled to Cenvat Credit for C & F Agent services. Consequently, the impugned orders were set aside, and the appeals were allowed.