Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2017 (5) TMI 94

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... (11) TMI 779 - CESTAT NEW DELHI], where it was held that as availment of Service Tax credit incurred on courier charges for remittance of Service Tax on the assessee s output services of Maintenance or Repair and Erection, Commissioning or Installation Services, for the reasons alike since the courier and Goods Transport Agency Services are input services for rendition of output services, cenvat credit is equally admissible. In the present case, the property in the goods passes when the goods are actually delivered to the customer in the foreign country. Till the goods are delivered to the buyer, the ownership / property in the goods remain with the seller because the goods are sold on CIF basis. - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appe .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... by the appellant is through courier mode i.e., export of goods by courier. The export of goods is on CIF terms i.e., Cost Insurance and Freight till the delivery of the goods to the purchasers abroad i.e., customers door delivery and the appellant has to bear the expenses of insurance and freight and the goods have to be delivered till the buyers premises outside India. Till the goods are delivered at the buyers place outside India, the risk and ownership/property in the goods rests with the appellant. As per the department s stand, the courier service does not fall in the definition of input service and therefore, the appellant has irregularly availed the CENVAT credit. On these allegations, the Department issued a show-cause notice dated .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 5) of the Finance Act, 1994. He further submitted that even if it is assumed without admitting that the appellant had received outward transportation, the lower authorities were still wrong in denying the CENVAT credit, since it is a case of the appellant that the place of removal in the present case is the buyers premises outside India as defined in Rule 4(3)(c) of the Central Excise Act, 1944. He further submitted that the Commissioner (A) has overlooked the crucial fact that the appellant has utilized the courier services for the purpose of export of goods and the services used in or in relation to the manufacture and export of goods are very much entitled for the benefit of credit. He further submitted that the courier service used for .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... impugned order and in support of his submission, the learned AR relied upon the following decisions: i. Hero Motocorp Ltd. vs. CCE: 2014 (36) STR 1128 (Tri.-Del.) ii. CCE, Ahmedabad: Cadila Healthcare Ltd.: 2013 (30) STR 3 (Guj.) iii. Kuntal Granites Ltd. vs. CCE, Bangalore: 2007 (215) ELT 515 (Tri.-Bang.) 7. After considering the submissions of both the parties and perusal of the record and the judgments cited by the appellant in support of his submission, I am of the view that the impugned orders denying the CENVAT credit of service tax paid on courier service is not sustainable in law in view of the various decisions relied upon by the appellant. Further, I find that in the case of Radical Instruments: 2016 (46) STR 631, the Tribu .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ourt in the case of Paper Products Ltd. (supra) and such circulars are binding on the department. Placing reliance on earlier judgments of the Supreme Court in the cases of CCE v. Usha Martin Industries, 1997 (94) E.L.T. 460 (S.C) = (1997) 7 SCC 47; Ranadey Micronutrients v. CCE, 1996 (87) E.L.T. 19 (S.C.) = (1996) 10 SCC 387; CCE v. Jayant Dalal (P) Ltd., 1996 (88) E.L.T. 638 (S.C) = (1997) 10 SCC 402 and CCE v. Kores (India) Ltd., 1997 (89) E.L.T. 441 (S.C.) = (1997) 10 SCC 338, Hon'ble the Supreme Court concluded in para 5 as under :- "5. It is clear from the abovesaid pronouncements of this Court that, apart from the fact that the Circulars issued by the Board are binding on the Department, the Department is precluded from challenging .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates