Del. HC: Obtaining of Voice Samples of Accused Must be in Compliance with Telegraph Act  ||  P&H HC: Peaceful Protest is Not a Penal Offence Under Section 188 IPC  ||  All HC: AO Must Consider Form 10 u/s 17 Supplied After Limitation But Before Assessment is Completed  ||  Ker. HC Issues Guidelines on Handling Digital Evidence Containing Sexually Explicit Materials  ||  Del. HC: Cyber Crimes Dissuade Aspirations of Advanced 'Digital Bharat'  ||  Del. HC: Suspension of Entity Can’t be Continued Indefinitely  ||  Del. HC: Woman Can be 'Karta' of HUF  ||  SC: Court Can’t Impose Bail Condition that Husband Must Resume Conjugal Life with Wife  ||  SC Takes Suo Moto Cognizance of Cal. HC Judgment that Adviced Adolescents on Sexual Behavior  ||  JKL HC: Court Can’t be Guided by Personal Law While Deciding Apportionment of Compensation    

Matrix Comsee Pvt Ltd vs. C.C.E. & S.T. Vadodara-I - (Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal) (06 Apr 2022)

Cenvat Credit in respect of Courier Service is admissible


Service Tax

The facts of the case is that, during the disputed period i.e. April 2015 to June 2017, the Appellant had availed Cenvat credit on the basis of invoices issued by the DHL Express India Ltd., and Fedex Express Transport and Supply Chain Service. However, during the course of audit, the department objected to the issue of availment of Cenvat credit on the ground that, service provider had collected the consignment from the Appellant's factory gate and delivered the goods at the overseascustomers, hence, services which were rendered and received by the Appellant are beyond the place of removal and not covered under the definition of "Input Service" as per the definition given under Rule 2(l) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004.

Based on the audit report, the Department initiated show cause proceedings against the appellant, seeking for disallowance of alleged irregularly availed Cenvat credit. The matter was adjudicated by the Assistant Commissioner, vide Order-In-Original, wherein the proposal made in the show cause notices were dropped. Being aggrieved by the impugned order, department has filed Appeal. The Learned Commissioner (Appeals) vide impugned order -in-appeal decided the matter against the Appellant and confirmed the Cenvat demand. Feeling aggrieved with the impugned order- in-appeal, the Appellant has preferred this appeal before the Tribunal.

The Appellant claimed that the Courier Service was used for delivery of their export goods from their factory premises to the premises of customers abroad. The impugned service was used by the Appellant for export of goods. In these circumstances, the Appellant is entitled to avail Cenvat credit on input service namely Courier Services which have been availed by the Appellant in the course of their business to export of goods. further, in number of cases Tribunal has consistently taken a view that Cenvat Credit in respect of Courier Service is admissible. There is no merit in impugned order -in-appeal, consequently the same is set aside. Appeal allowed.


Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2023 - All Rights Reserved