Byju’s Second Rights Issue for Raising Funds Halted by NCLT  ||  Byju’s Second Rights Issue for Raising Funds Halted by NCLT  ||  Gau. HC: Party Can Invoke Arbitration Despite Alternative Remedy Available Under RERA Act  ||  Mad. HC: Sexual Harassment at Workplace a ‘Continuing Offence’ If Causes Constant Trauma and Fear  ||  Delhi High Court: U/S 9 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Scope of Inquiry is Limited  ||  Meghalaya High Court: Bail Plea Rejected Despite Delay in Trial  ||  Pat. HC: After Commen. of Trial, Amen. of Pleadings Allowed if Required to Arrive at Just Conclusion  ||  Gau. HC: If Delay in Filing Matri. Appeal Not Satisfactorily Expl., Bar Against Remarriage Not Applic  ||  Bombay High Court: Release of Film "Shaadi Ke Director Karan Aur Johar" Restrained  ||  Mad. HC: Separate Norms for Transgender Persons in Employment and Education    

Phillips Carbon Black Limited VS C.C.E. & S.T.-Vadodara-ii - (Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal) (29 Apr 2022)

Cenvat Credit is available in case of outward transportation for the services availed from the place of removal up to the customers place

MANU/CS/0095/2022

Service Tax

The issue involved in the present case is that whether the Appellant is entitled for cenvat credit in respect of outward GTA for period prior to 1st April, 2008.

The Appellant submits that from 1st April, 2008 in the main clause of the definition of the input service, the service related to removal of inputs was "from the place of removal", which was amended as "up to place of removal". Therefore, prior to 1st April, 2008 the cenvat credit on outward GTA was available.

Prior to 1st April, 2008, the services related to removal of the goods was "from the place of removal" which was replaced as amended with effect from 1st April, 2008 as "up to the place of removal". Therefore, the Cenvat Credit prima facie is available in case of outward transportation for the services availed from the place of removal up to the customers place. However, Board has prescribed certain conditions for allowing credit which need to be satisfied. Since the adjudicating authority has not verified the fact that, whether the said conditions of Board Circular have been complied with or not, the matter needs to be reconsidered.

Therefore, the impugned order is liable to be set aside and Appeal deserves to be remanded to the Adjudicating Authority for passing a fresh order after verifying the documents to ascertain that whether the appellant has fulfilled the condition as prescribed in the Board's Circular No. 97/8/2007-ST dated 23rd August, 2007.

Tags : CENVAT CREDIT   ENTITLEMENT   OUTWARD TRANSPORTATION  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2024 - All Rights Reserved