9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (1) TMI 1160X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... -by - for the period beyond 31.3.2008, the benefit of CENVAT credit on GTA service used for outward transportation of final products from the place of removal was not admissible to the manufacturer of the final products – the assessee was not to establish prima facie case in their favour – thus, the appellant directed to pre-deposit 50% of the duty – upon such submission rest of the duty to be sta ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... redit Rules, 2004 as amended with effect from 1.4.2008, the appellant is not entitled to claim CENVAT credit on the transportation of the goods from the factory to the premises of their customers. The case of the learned counsel is that the original and the appellate authorities travelled beyond the scope of the show-cause notice. He submits that the place of removal was misconceived by both the a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ditional Commissioner (AR), on the other hand, submits that the issue is covered by Final Order Nos.335-336/2012 dated 29.5.2012 passed by this bench in the case of M/s. Madras Cements Ltd. Vs. CCE, Bangalore [(Appeals No. E/360-361/2010) (Para 6)]. He submits that the contentions raised by the assesse with regard to place of removal could not be accepted by the learned Commissioner (Appeals) in t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 8 has been given a go-by. We considered this definition in the final order cited by the learned Additional Commissioner (AR) and took the view that, for the period beyond 31.3.2008, the benefit of CENVAT credit on GTA service used for outward transportation of final products from the place of removal was not admissible to the manufacturer of the final products. In other words, there are two reason ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
