9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (4) TMI 215X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 07 are satisfied, then the assessee is entitled to take CENVAT credit of service tax paid on GTA service - credit allowed - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - Appeal(s) Involved: E/21123/2017-SM - Final Order No. 20152 / 2018 - Dated:- 7-2-2018 - SHRI S.S GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER Ms. Radhika Srirenjani, Advocate, For the Appellant Shri Madhupsharan, Asst. Commissioner(AR), For the Respondent per S.S GARG The present appeal is directed against the impugned order dt. 21/04/2017 passed by the Commissioner(Appeals) whereby the Commissioner(Appeals) has rejected the appeal of the appellant and upheld the Order-in-Original. 2. Briefly the facts of the case are that the appellants are engaged in the manufa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 3. 2,87,596/- 2,87,596 April 2014 to September 2015 3. Aggrieved by the Orders-in-Original, the appellant filed appeal before the Commissioner(Appeals) on the ground that the price is based on FOR basis and the purchase order also proves that the cost of transportation found part of the price of the goods and the ownership and the property in the goods is transferred to the buyer only when the goods reached the buyer. The learned Commissioner(Appeals) after considering the submissions of the appellant rejected the appeal. Hence the present appeal. 4. Heard both the sides and perused the records. 5. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the impugned ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... transportation forms part of the price of the goods and the ownership and the property of the goods is transferred to the buyer only when the goods reached the buyer at his door step in an acceptable condition. The learned counsel further submitted that these facts can be substantiated with the purchase order raised by the clients of the appellant and he referred to the purchase order where the condition stated therein is FOR basis. In support his submission, he relied upon the following decisions: - i. Commissioner vs. Thiru Arooran Sugars ltd. [2015(39) STR J304] ii. Commissioner vs. Rhine Machine Tools [2016(42) STR 809] iii. Madras Cements Ltd. Vs. Addle Commissioner of Central Excise [21 5(40) STR 645] iv. Commissione ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
