2019 (5) TMI 1778

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... en issued due to change of opinion, on the part of the Department. It is not the case of contumacious conduct and suppression of facts. Further, in view of the several other judgements and Circular of the Board dated 23.08.2007, it was provided that an appellant can take cenvat credit of outward transportation where the goods are delivered FOR and risk in transit is borne by the seller of the goods and the goods are accepted by the buyer at his door. The show cause notice is bad for invoking extended period of limitation - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
Hon'ble Mr. Anil Choudhary, Member (Judicial) Shri Nitin N.Mehta, Consultant for the appellant. Ms. Tamnna Alam, Authorised Representative for the respondent ORDER .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... rds determination of /place of removal in general, the principles laid down by the Ispat Industries Ltd., may be applied [2015 (324) ELT 670 (SC), wherein it has been held that "place of removal" is required to be determined with reference to point of sale. Further, the Board specified the exceptions to the ruling laid down in the case of Ispat Industries Ltd., where the contract for sale is FOR basis. In the similar circumstances, identical judgement in the case of Emco Ltd. - 2015 (322) ELT 394 (SC) and also in the case of M/s.Roofit Industries Ltd. (supra). In the case of FOR destination sale, such as in the case of Emco Ltd. (supra) and Roofit Industries (supra), where the ownership, risk in transit remained with the seller, till the go .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ion to evade payment of duty. I find that the show cause notice have been issued due to change of opinion, on the part of the Department. It is not the case of contumacious conduct and suppression of facts. Further, in view of the several other judgements and Circular of the Board dated 23.08.2007, it was provided that an appellant can take cenvat credit of outward transportation where the goods are delivered FOR and risk in transit is borne by the seller of the goods and the goods are accepted by the buyer at his door. Accordingly, I find that the show cause notice is bad for invoking extended period of limitation. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and the impugned order is set aside. The appellant is entitled to consequential benefit. [ .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X