9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (5) TMI 887X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ch Cement Ltd [ 2019 (2) TMI 1487 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD ] and M/s. Sanghi Industries Ltd. [ 2019 (2) TMI 1488 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD ] cases decided by the Ahmedabad Bench. The Cenvat Credit is specifically denied to the Section 4 goods, since abatement is provided for the outward freight charges for arriving at the assessable value. Notably such abatement is available even if the outward freight charges are collected from the buyers as held in Ispat Industries case [ 2015 (10) TMI 613 - SUPREME COURT ] by the Hon ble Supreme Court - the Cenvat Credit taken on the Service Tax paid on outward freight charges cannot be denied to the Appellant. The Appellant governed by Section 4A valuation for their clearance, cannot be denied the benefit of Cenvat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d Counsel submits that documentary evidence has been placed to the effect that the Appellant has borne the freight for the cement dispatched on MRP basis to the distributors/dealers. He further submits that in such cases, the Excise duty is paid in terms of Section 4A which is based on the MRP (RSP) charged for the cement bags. Since the price is based on MRP, the responsibility is on the Appellant to pay the freight charges and deliver the goods to the premises of the distributors/dealers. They have submitted the Chartered Accountant s Certificate to this effect. Since the freight charges forms the total cost, they have correctly taken the Cenvat Credit. He submits that in the normal course, when the goods are cleared under Section 4 of CE ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s. He relies on the case law of CCE ST Vs. Ultra Tech Cement Ltd.-2018 (9) G.S.T.L. 337 (S.C.), wherein the Hon ble Supreme Court has held that the Cenvat Credit can be taken for the input services used only on up to the place of removal . Accordingly, he submits that the present Appeal is liable to be dismissed. 6. The Appellant has submitted the Chartered Accountant s Certificate dated 12th April 2024 to the effect that invoices are made on FOR basis and the freight is being borne by the Appellant and is not charged on the buyer. It also certifies that the goods cleared to the distributor are in terms of Section 4A of CEA, 1944, wherein the responsibility to deliver the goods till doorstep of the customers is that of the Appellant. 7. Hea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... le for delivery of the goods till the doorstep of the buyer. Based on these factual details and relying on the case law of CCE Vs. Roofit Industries Ltd.-2015 (319) ELT 221 (SC), the Hon ble Bench has held as under : - 5. We find that the Chartered/ Cost Accountant has certified that the goods were sold on FOR basis by the Appellant and the freight/ damages in transit was responsibility of Appellant till the goods reached the doorstep of the Customers. Also we find that the consignment notes were raised upon the Appellant and they did not charge any amount except price of the goods from the customers. Thus in the light of above circular we find that as the ownership of the goods remained with the Appellants till the goods reached to the cus ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... be seen that the Bench has also considered the judgment of Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of CCE ST Vs. Ultratech Cement relied by the Learned AR and has held that the same is not applicable to the facts of the case on hand. 13. In the present case, the Appellant has produced Chartered Accountant s Certificate to the effect that the Appellant is responsible for delivery of the goods upto the doorstep of the buyers. This Certificate also shows that the Appellant has borne freight charges and has not passed on the burden to the buyer. Therefore, the facts are identical to the cited case of Ultratech Cement Ltd and M/s. Sanghi Industries Ltd. cases decided by the Ahmedabad Bench. Therefore, relying on these decisions, I allow the Appeal. 14 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cisable goods have been permitted to be deposited without [payment of duty;] [(iii) a depot, premises of a consignment agent or any other place or premises from where the excisable goods are to be sold after their clearance from the factory;] from where such goods are removed; 15. On the other hand, Section 4A which pertains to valuation of excisable goods subject to Retail Sale Price (MRP), does not have any reference to the place of removal . Therefore, while the place of removal has been defined for goods exigible to Section 4 goods, the Place of Removal‟ provision is inapplicable in the case Section 4A goods. Hence, the exclusion given under Rule 2(l) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 with reference to upto the place of Removal can ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
