9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (12) TMI 445X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fit and therefore no illegality in the impugned orders, which calls for interference - Following decision of C.C.E. & S.T, Belgaum v. Vasavadatta Cements Ltd. [2010 (9) TMI 865 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT] - Decided in favour of assessee. - E/2098/2009-SM(BR) - Final Order No. 953/2011-SM(BR)(PB) - Dated:- 15-12-2011 - Shri D.N. Panda, J. Shri A.P. Mathur, Advocate, for the Appellant. Shri R.K. Verma, DR, for the Respondent. ORDER Learned Counsel submits that transportation charges paid for delivery of goods at the buyer s premises was subject to service tax under Finance Act, 1994 and claim of input credit of Rs. 41,100/- made for service tax so paid was disallowed. This comes out from Para 13(ii) of the impugned order. Accord ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... half of Revenue that legislature clearly said that words and expression used in Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 and not defined but defined in the Central Excise Act or the Finance Act shall have the meaning respectively assigned to them in those acts. Therefore, what that is place of removal for the purpose of Central Excise Act, 1944 shall govern the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 for construing meaning of the term place of removal . Relevant provision contained in Section 4(3)(c) of Central Excise Act, 1944 reads as under :- (c) place of removal means - (i) a factory or any other place or premises of production or manufacture of the excisable goods; (ii) a warehouse or any other place on premises wherein the excisable goods have ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s. 41,100/-. There is no instruction with the learned D.R. as to whether judgment of Hon ble High Court of Karnataka cited by Appellant has been stayed or reversed by higher Court. 5. Heard both sides and perused the record. 6. So far as quantum of claim of Rs. 41,100/- is concerned, that is not in dispute. But what is in dispute is whether service tax to that extent incurred for transportation of goods made from depot to the buyer s premises shall be permissible as Cenvat credit and whether transport of goods made from depot to buyer s premises shall be called input service. 7. It is interesting to note from Para 13 of the first appellate order that Cenvat credit on GTA service for transportation from factory to buyer s premises is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... redit Rules, 2004. There was no dispute by Revenue on F.O.R. delivery plea of appellant. 8. Hon ble High Court of Karnataka has dealt with a situation of aforesaid nature in the case of Vasavadatta Cements Ltd. (supra). In para 6 of that judgment Hon ble Karnataka High Court has held as under :- Service extends to the stage of handing over the goods to the customers for whom it is meant and therefore, any service tax paid up to that point, is to be taken into consideration while granting the Cenvat benefit. 9. In view of the above, it is difficult to agree with the learned D.R. to confirm first appellate order. Therefore, that order in so far as disallowance of Cenvat credit of Rs. 41,100/- is concerned, is reversed and appeal is al ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
