9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2013 (2) TMI 85 - AT - Central ExciseCENVAT Credit of Service Tax paid on outward courier services and CHA services - denial as these services were rendered after the goods were cleared from the place of removal - Held that - If the goods are exported, there are catena of decisions which indicate that the place of removal is port. Reliance placed by the assessee on the judgments in the case of MTR Foods Ltd (2011 (1) TMI 143 - CESTAT, BANGALORE), Cadila Healthcare Ltd (2009 (8) TMI 172 - CESTAT, AHMEDABAD) & ROLEX RINGS P. LTD. (2008 (2) TMI 295 - CESTAT, AHMEDABAD) are directly on the issue - in favour of assessee.
Issues:
1. Availment of CENVAT Credit on service tax paid by service providers for outward courier and CHA services post goods clearance. Analysis: The appeal in question challenges Order-in-Appeal No. SA/25/VAPI/2011, which raised concerns about the appellant availing CENVAT Credit on Service Tax paid by service providers for courier and CHA services post goods clearance. The lower authorities contended that such credit should not have been claimed as the services were rendered after goods clearance. The appellant argued that the services were for export purposes, but this contention was disregarded, leading to a demand confirmation with interest and penalties, prompting the appeal. The appellant's counsel cited various Tribunal decisions, including MTR Foods Ltd 2011 (22) STR 472, Cadila Healthcare Ltd 2010 (17) STR 134, and Roles Rings Pvt. Ltd 2008 (230) ELT 609 to support their case. On the other hand, the Additional Commissioner (A.R.) argued that the services in question were indeed used for exporting goods. Upon thorough consideration, it was established that the appellant had utilized courier and CHA services for exporting goods from November 2004 to October 2008, with the service providers paying the Service Tax claimed as CENVAT Credit by the appellant. The judgment highlighted that when goods are exported, the port serves as the place of removal, aligning with the legal precedents cited by the appellant's counsel. Consequently, the impugned order was deemed unsustainable and set aside, resulting in the appeal being allowed with consequential relief granted to the appellant.
|
