2024 (9) TMI 1647 - AT - Central Excise

CENVAT Credit - outward transportation of the finished product namely cement from the factory / to dealers to the buyer s premises - HELD THAT - The issue of eligibility of credit on outward transportation of goods has been considered by the Tribunal in the appellant s own case for different periods and the matters have been remanded. The Tribunal observed in M/S. THE RAMCO CEMENTS LTD. VERSUS THE COMMISSIONER OF CGST CENTRAL EXCISE, TRICHY 2024 (7) TMI 680 - CESTAT CHENNAI where it was held that 'the Tribunal had considered the definition of input services prior to 01.04.2008 as well as after 01.04.2008 and held that the credit is eligible.' The matter requires to be remanded to the Adjudicating Authority for ascertaining the place of removal and also for considering whether the appellant is eligible for Cenvat Credit of service tax paid on outward transportation. The impugned orders are set aside - Appeal allowed by way of remand.

Summary

Issues:
Eligibility of Cenvat Credit on outward transportation of finished products.

Analysis:
The appellant, engaged in cement manufacturing, availed Cenvat Credit of service tax paid on outward transportation of finished products, which the department contested. Show cause notices were issued, leading to disallowance of credit, demand confirmation, interest imposition, and penalties by the Original Authority. The appellant appealed to the Tribunal.

The appellant's consultant argued that a similar issue had been considered previously, and the matter was remanded to ascertain the place of removal based on a Larger Bench decision. The department's representatives also appeared before the Tribunal.

The Tribunal had considered the eligibility of credit on outward transportation in the appellant's previous cases and had remanded the matters. Referring to a specific Final Order, the Tribunal highlighted the importance of determining the place of removal based on relevant judgments and circulars. The consultant argued that if the sale was on a Free on Rail (FOR) basis, the buyer's premises constituted the place of removal, making the appellant eligible for credit.

In a previous Final Order, the Tribunal had deemed the credit eligible based on the definition of input services. Consequently, the Tribunal concluded that the matter should be remanded to the Adjudicating Authority to verify documents and establish the place of removal. If the buyer's premises were confirmed as the place of removal, the appellant would be entitled to credit, guided by previous decisions.

Ultimately, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order, allowing the appeal by remanding the matter to the Adjudicating Authority for further examination. The decision was based on the need to ascertain the place of removal and determine the appellant's eligibility for Cenvat Credit on outward transportation of finished products. The impugned orders were overturned, and the appeals were allowed for remand to the Adjudicating Authority.