9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (5) TMI 1514X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion to the appellant to clarify its stand ie., what was sent was courier were samples or manufactured goods and then it is for the adjudicating authority to give a finding after considering the same in accordance with law - appeal allowed by way of remand. - E/40019/2018 - Final Order No. 41554/2018 - Dated:- 24-5-2018 - Hon ble P. Dinesha, Member ( Judicial ) Shri Vikram Kataria, C.A., for the appellant Ms. P. Hemavathi, Commr. ( AR ), for the respondent ORDER The appellant before me is engaged in the manufacture of parts of Washing Machine, Refrigerator, Coffee Maker and Weighing Machine falling under Chapter 84 and as such was availing Cenvat credit on inputs, input services and capital goods for the period May 201 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ieved by the said order of the Commissioner (Appeals), the assessee is now before this Tribunal and the assessee is mainly agitating the finding given by the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) wherein, the Commissioner (Appeals) has observed that the courier used for sending samples by the appellant to its clients amounted to outward transportation of goods, which was allowed only up to the place of removal (factory gate); and the balance of services pertaining to outward transportation stood rejected. 4. During the course of hearing, it was argued that the Cenvat credit on courier used was for sending samples to their clients amounted to outward transportation of goods. Further, hence the receipt of input service was not disputed and the fact t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dabad Bench of the Tribunal in the case of CCE, Vapi Vs. Parle International Pvt. Ltd. 2012 (278) ELT 625 (Tri.-Ahmd.) and that there is no dispute in the case that the courier service was used for sending samples to the customers for approval and for communicating with their branch office to send documents and other correspondences, etc. 5. On behalf of the Revenue, Ld. Commissioner, Ms. P. Hemavathi vehemently contended that the order of the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) requires no interference and also drew support from the findings given by the authorities below. 6.1 I have considered the rival contentions along with case law relied upon by the parties. The appellant on one hand claims that he has sending only the samples by couri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
