9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (4) TMI 189X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ated 23.08.2007, transportation of final products from the place of removal stood within the ambit of the definition of input service prior to 01.04.2008. The benefit of the High Court's decision in [2011 (3) TMI 248 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT] is available to the appellant - Decided in favour of assessee. - CE.2555 & 2563/2011 - 25007 & 25008/2013 - Dated:- 16-1-2013 - P G Chacko, J. For the Appellant : Mr B Venugopal, Adv. For the Respondent : Mr Ganesh Haavanur, Additional Commissioner (AR) Per: P G Chacko: On a perusal of the records and hearing both sides, I find a common issue arising in these appeals, which can be formulated as follows: "Whether, on the facts of these cases, the appellants were entitled to CENVAT c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... canvassing and procuring of orders) as input services within the meaning of the definition of "input service" given under Rule 2(l) of the CENVAT Credit Rules 2004. 3. Following the decision rendered in the case of Metro Shoes Pvt. Ltd. (supra), the Tribunal, in the case of Lanco Industries Ltd. Vs. CCE, Tirupati 2010 (17) S.T.R. 350 (Tri.-Bang., held that, as the sales commission had been paid by the assessee to the commission agent only in respect of the sales made through the commission agent, the services rendered by the commission agents to the assessee fell within the definition of "input service" under Rule 2(l) of the CCR 2004. Thus, the common issue involved in the present appeals is held in favour of the appellants. 4. In the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... submits that the larger bench decision stands upheld by the Hon'ble High Court in CCE ST, Bangalore Vs. ABB Ltd. [2011 (23) STR 97 (Kar.)]. The learned Commissioner (AR) acknowledges this factual position. 3. The period of dispute in the present case is prior to 01.04.2008, the date on which a significant amendment was brought to Rule 2(l)(ii) of the CCR. The Hon'ble High Court held that, notwithstanding the Board's clarification in Circular No. 97/8/2007-ST dated 23.08.2007, transportation of final products from the place of removal stood within the ambit of the definition of input service prior to 01.04.2008. The benefit of the High Court's decision is available to the appellant and therefore the impugned order is set aside and thi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
