2013 (4) TMI 383 - AT - Central Excise

Cenvat credit on Outward Freight Services denied - non admissibility under Rule 2(l) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 as the same are beyond the place of removal - demand for the period November 2005 to March 2008 as evident from SCN - Held that - As decided in Commissioner of Central Excise & Service Tax, LTU, Bangalore vs. ABB Limited 2011 (3) TMI 248 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT and Commissioner of Central Excise & Customs vs. Parth Poly Wooven Pvt. Limited 2012 (25) STR 4 (Guj.)2011 (4) TMI 975 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT , wherein it has been held that up to 01.4.2008, due to the prevailing definition, cenvat credit on outward freight service was admissible. In favour of assessee.

Summary

Issues involved:
Taking of cenvat credit on Outward Freight Services from November 2005 to July 2010.

Analysis:
The appellant filed an appeal against an order dated 21.06.2012, regarding the admissibility of cenvat credit on outward freight services. The Department contended that such credit is not admissible under Rule 2(l) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, as they are beyond the place of removal. The appellant cited judgments in support of their claim, emphasizing that until 01.4.2008, cenvat credit on outward freight services was permissible. The learned A.R. reiterated the reasoning of the first appellate authority. Upon review, it was observed that the dispute pertained to the period from November 2005 to March 2008, with a separate amount calculated for April 2008 to July 2010.

The appellant relied on judgments from the High Courts of Karnataka and Gujarat, which clarified that cenvat credit on Goods Transport Agency Services was admissible before 01.4.2008. The judgment highlighted the interpretation of the phrase "activities relating to business" and the legislative intent behind the Cenvat Rules. It emphasized that transportation charges for clearance of final products from the place of removal were included in the definition of input service until the legislative amendment effective from 1-4-2008. The Tribunal's interpretation of "activities relating to business" was deemed contrary to legislative intent before the said amendment. Based on the precedents set by the Karnataka and Gujarat High Courts, it was concluded that cenvat credit on outward freight services until 01.4.2008 was indeed admissible to the appellant. Consequently, the appeal was allowed, overturning the first appellate authority's decision.

In conclusion, the judgment clarified the admissibility of cenvat credit on outward freight services up to 01.4.2008, based on the interpretation of relevant legal provisions and precedents set by the Karnataka and Gujarat High Courts. The appellant's appeal was upheld, setting aside the order of the first appellate authority.