9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (10) TMI 326X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d involved is upto October 2005 when the definition of input service under Rule 2(l) specifically included admissibility of input service credit with respect to input services utilized from the place of removal is admissible - Only with effect from 01.04.2008 (under Notification No.10/2008-CE (NT), dt.01.03.2008), the words ‘clearance of final products from the place of removal’ were submitted with the words ‘clearance of final products upto the place of removal’ - Following CCE Vs. Parth Poly Woven Pvt.Ltd. [2011 (4) TMI 975 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT] - The expression ‘includes’ cannot be used to oust any activity from the main body of the definition if it is otherwise covered by the expression ‘means’ - The expression ‘includes’ followed by ‘m ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... epot, premises of a consignment agent or any other place or premises from where the excisable goods are to be sold after their clearance from the factory from where such goods are removed. Rule 2(l) Input service means any service - (i) used by a provider of taxable service for providing an output service, or (ii) used by the manufacturer, whether directly or indirectly, in or in relation to the manufacture of final products and clearance of final products from the place of removal, and includes services used in relation to setting up, modernization, renovation or repairs of a factory, premises of provider of output service or an office relation to such factory or premises, advertisement or sales promotion, market research, stora ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by the manufacturers for transportation of finished goods from the place of removal upto the premises of the purchaser is covered within the definition of input service provided in Rule 2(l) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. 4. It was accordingly argued that the case of the present appellants is covered by the judgment of Gujarat High Court and the appeals are required to be allowed. 5. Dr. J. Nagori, (A.R.) on behalf of the Revenue reiterated the stand taken by Commissioner (Appeals). 6. Heard both sides and perused the case records. In both these appeals, the period involved is upto October 2005 when the definition of input service under Rule 2(l) specifically included admissibility of input service credit with respect to input se ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
