SC: Suit Alleging Coercion or Undue Influence Cannot be Rejected under Order VII Rule 11 CPC  ||  Cal HC: Once ED Attachment is Confirmed, Challenge Becomes Academic; PMLA Remedy Must be Pursued  ||  MP HC: Pen-Drive Evidence Cannot be Introduced At a Late Trial Stage Without Proof or Relevance  ||  Calcutta HC: Employee Can't be Stopped From Joining Rival Post-Resignation; Trade Secrets Protected  ||  Calcutta HC: Banks Must Provide Forensic Audit Report Before Calling an Account Fraudulent  ||  Del HC: Woman Cannot Demand Re-Entry to Abandoned Matrimonial Home if Alternate Accommodation Exists  ||  Calcutta HC: Land Acquisition For Industrial Park is Public Purpose; Leasing to Industry is Valid  ||  Patna HC: PwD Recruitment Must Comply With RPwD Act; Executive Resolutions Cannot Override the Law  ||  Madras HC: Individuals Facing Criminal Trial Must Get Court Permission Even to Renew Passports  ||  Calcutta HC: Demolition Orders Cannot be Challenged under Article 226 if a Statutory Appeal Exists    

Nandan Petrochem Ltd vs C.C.E and ST - (Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal) (28 Apr 2021)

Cenvat Credit on Outward Transportation Services is admissible up to the place of removal

MANU/CS/0028/2021

Excise

The issue involved in the present case is that whether the Appellant is entitled for Cenvat Credit in respect of Outward Transport Service which is used for transportation of goods from the factory of the appellant to their various depots.

The Appellant submits that, it is admitted even by the Adjudicating Authority that, the transportation service in question is from the factory gate to depot. Therefore, the outward transportation service was used up to the place of removal. He submits that, moreover the valuation of the goods is on MRP basis under Section 4A of Central Excise Act, 1944, for this reason also the Cenvat credit on outward transportation service in respect of goods supplied under MRP based valuation is admissible.

There is no dispute that, in the present case Outward Transportation Service was used for transportation of goods from the factory of the appellant to their own depot. In this case even as per Section 4 of the Central Excise Act, the place of removal is the depot and not the factory gate. Moreover, the valuation of goods is on MRP basis.

In such circumstances, as per the plain reading of the Input Service definition Cenvat Credit on Outward Transportation Services is admissible up to the place of removal. In the present case depot being the place of removal, outward transportation service was used undisputedly up to the place of removal. The judgment of this tribunal cited by the learned Counsel is directly applicable in the facts of the present case. Therefore, the Appellant are entitled for the Cenvat Credit in respect of the Outward Transportation Service. The impugned order is set aside and appeals are allowed.

Tags : CENVAT CREDIT   ENTITLEMENT  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2026 - All Rights Reserved