9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (4) TMI 346X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the disputed period. The case remanded back to the original authority to pass a fresh order after examining the various documents for the disputed period - appeal allowed by way of remand. - Central Excise Appeal No. 20754 of 2019 - Final Order No. 20097/2021 - Dated:- 1-4-2021 - MR. S.S GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER For the Appellant : Mr. Vivek Sharma, Advocate For the Respondent : Mr. P. Gopakumar, Joint Commissioner (AR) ORDER The present appeal is directed against the impugned order dated 08/05/2019 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) whereby the Commissioner (Appeals) has rejected the appeal of the appellant. Briefly the facts of the present case are that the appellants are engaged in the manufacture of Cement and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... present appeal. 2. Heard both the parties and perused the records. 3. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the impugned order is not sustainable in law as the same has been passed without properly appreciating the facts and the law. He further submitted that onus of proof lies on the Department to prove that in the appellants case customer s premises is not the place of removal because the Department is alleging that the appellants are not entitled for availment of credit of service tax paid on transportation of goods beyond the place of removal. He further submitted that the appellants are eligible for cenvat credit of service tax on outward transportation up to the customer s premises for the period w.e.f. 01/04/2008. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... IR 1980 Kar. 92 (Full Bench) Tribhovandas Purshottamdas Thakkar V. Ratilal Motilal Patel, AIR 1968 SC 372 Jayaswals NECO Ltd. V. CCE, 2006 (195) E.L.T. 142 (S.C) Ultratech Cement Ltd. V. CCE, Final Order passed by the Division Bench of the Tribunal at Ahmedabad vide A/10373/2019 dated 25/02/2019 Sanghi Industries Ltd. V. CCE, Final Order passed by the Division Bench of the Tribunal at Ahmedabad vide A/10374-10375/2019 dated 25/02/2019 CCE V. Roofit Industries Ltd. 2015 (319) E.L.T. 221 (SC) CCE V. EMCO Ltd. 2015 (322) E.L.T. 394 (SC) Madras Cements Ltd. V. Addl. CCE 2015 (40) S.T.R. 645 (Kar.) 3.1. Learned counsel also submitted that on identical issue, this Tribunal in the case of Bharat Fri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ubmissions of both the parties and perusal of the material on record as well as the various judgments relied upon by both the parties cited supra, I find that after the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Ultratech, the CBEC has issued the Circular dated 08/06/2018 wherein the field formation have been given the liberty to examine each and every case on the basis of the law laid down in various cases. I also find that after the Circular issued by the Board various Benches of the Tribunal have remanded the case back to the original authority to examine the eligibility of cenvat credit of service tax on transportation of goods up to the customer s premises after the period w.e.f. 01/04/2008. By following the ratio of the said decisions, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
