9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (9) TMI 1001 - AT - Central ExciseCENVAT Credit - input services - outward GTA in case the sale is on FOR basis - HELD THAT - It is not disputed that the sale is on FOR basis. On the identical facts, in the appellant s own case SCHAEFFLER INDIA LTD. VERSUS C.C.E. S.T. -VADODARA-I 2022 (4) TMI 514 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD , this Tribunal has decided the issue in hand, where it was held that in case of FOR sale, the cenvat credit on outward transportation is admissible. Therefore, as per the facts of the present case, the sale being FOR sale and freight is inclusive in the price of the goods and the same was not charged separately to the customers, the cenvat credit in respect of outward transportation is admissible. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
Issues involved: Admissibility of Cenvat credit in respect of outward GTA in case of sale on FOR basis.
Analysis: 1. Admissibility of Cenvat credit: The issue at hand revolved around the admissibility of Cenvat credit in respect of outward Goods Transport Agency (GTA) in a scenario where the sale is conducted on a Free on Rail (FOR) basis. The appellant contended that the sale was indeed on FOR basis, with freight being borne by them. Reference was made to previous orders where similar issues were decided in favor of the appellant. The Tribunal allowed the early hearing application due to the matter being covered in the appellant's own case. 2. Legal Precedents: The learned Counsel highlighted that there was no dispute regarding the sale being on FOR basis, and freight being borne by the appellant. The matter was decided based on the Hon'ble Supreme Court judgment in the case of CCE & ST vs. Ultra Tech Cement Limited. The Tribunal examined previous cases such as Ultratech Cement Limited vs. CCE, Kutch and Sanghi Industries Limited vs. CCE, which were upheld by the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court. These cases established that in the scenario of sale on FOR basis, Cenvat credit on GTA is admissible. 3. Revenue's Position: The Revenue, represented by the Superintendent (AR), reiterated the findings of the impugned order without presenting any new arguments or evidence to challenge the appellant's claims. 4. Tribunal's Decision: After carefully considering the submissions from both sides and examining the records, the Tribunal found that the sale was indeed on FOR basis, which was consistent with the appellant's claims. Referring to previous orders and legal precedents, the Tribunal concluded that the appellant was entitled to Cenvat credit as the freight was an integral part of the price of the goods. The Tribunal set aside the impugned order and allowed the appeal based on the established legal principles and precedents. 5. Final Verdict: The Tribunal's decision was based on the established legal position regarding the admissibility of Cenvat credit in cases of sales conducted on FOR basis with freight being an integral part of the price of the goods. The issue was no longer res-integra as it was already decided in the appellant's favor in previous cases with similar facts. Therefore, the appeal was allowed based on the legal principles and precedents cited during the proceedings.
|
