Del. HC: Assessing Officer to Decide Whether Case is Fit for Issuance of Notice u/s 148 of IT Act  ||  Delhi HC: Under Arbitration Act, Date of Receipt of Corrected Award Would be Taken as Disposal Date  ||  MP HC: Punishment of Termination of Employee for Single Clerical Mistake ‘Excessive’  ||  Ker. HC: Can Extend Principle of Res Ipsa Loquitur to Criminal Cases Only for Assessment of Evidence  ||  P&H HC: While Adju. Pre-Arrest Bail Plea Manner in Which Accused is Arraigned in FIR is Important  ||  P&H HC: While Adju. Pre-Arrest Bail Plea Manner in Which Accused is Arraigned in FIR is Important  ||  Guj. HC: Can’t Use Nylon Threads, Cotton Threads With Glass Coating for Flying Kites  ||  Tel. HC: Parent Who is Lawful Guardian Taking Child from Custody of Other Parent is Not Kidnapping  ||  Mad. HC: Surplus Funds of Temple Cannot be used to Construct Shopping Complexes  ||  Del. HC: For Filing Additional WS After, Comm. Court Act Doesn't Prevent Appl. of Order 8 Rule 9 CPC    

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 2025 - All Rights Reserved