9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (1) TMI 539 - AT - Central ExciseCENVAT credit - GTA services - outward transportation of goods from November 2007 to January 2009 - Rule 14 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 read with Section 11A of Central Excise Act, 1944 - interest - penalty - Held that - as far as the Cenvat credit of service tax prior to 1.4.2008 is concerned, the appellant is squarely covered by the decision of the Hon ble High Court of Karnataka in the case of ABB Ltd. 2011 (3) TMI 248 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT , and credit allowed. Further, after the period 1.4.2008 to January 2009, the appellant is entitled to Cenvat credit in view of the Board s Circular dated 20.10.2014 and the judgment of the Hon ble High Court of Karnataka in the case of Madras Cements Ltd. 2015 (7) TMI 1001 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT , provided the adjudicating authority satisfies with regard to the terms and conditions of the sale with the buyer and the passing of ownership and the property in the goods, and for this purpose, the case is remanded. Appeal disposed off - appeal partly allowed and partly matter on remand.
Issues:
1. Denial of Cenvat credit on service tax paid for outward transportation. 2. Interpretation of relevant legal provisions and circulars. 3. Applicability of judicial precedents on Cenvat credit eligibility. 4. Remand of the case for further examination by the adjudicating authority. Analysis: 1. The appeal challenged the denial of Cenvat credit on service tax paid for outward transportation of goods by the appellant. The dispute arose from a Show-cause Notice proposing recovery of Cenvat credit, interest, and penalty. The Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals-I) upheld the denial, leading to the appellant's appeal before the Tribunal. 2. The appellant contended that the issue of Cenvat credit eligibility had been settled by judicial precedents, specifically citing the decision of the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka in the case of ABB Ltd. The appellant argued that the credit should be allowed based on the terms of delivery, ownership transfer, and property passing to the buyer, as per relevant circulars and judgments. 3. The Tribunal considered the submissions of both parties, along with the legal provisions and circulars cited. It acknowledged the applicability of the ABB Ltd. judgment for the period before 1.4.2008 and the subsequent circulars and judgments for the period after. The Tribunal found merit in the appellant's arguments and decided to partially allow the appeal for the period before 1.4.2008. For the subsequent period, the case was remanded to the original adjudicating authority for a detailed examination based on the principles of natural justice. 4. The Tribunal's order directed the adjudicating authority to reassess the appellant's right to claim Cenvat credit on outward transportation post-1.4.2008, considering the documents provided and in line with the Circular of the Board and the judgment of the High Court. The authority was instructed to decide the issue within three months from receiving a certified copy of the Tribunal's order, ensuring a fair and thorough examination of the appellant's eligibility for the credit. In conclusion, the Tribunal's decision addressed the issues of Cenvat credit denial, legal interpretations, judicial precedents, and the remand of the case for further examination, providing a detailed analysis and direction for the adjudicating authority to reevaluate the appellant's claim.
|
