P&H HC: Offence u/s 295A won’t be Attracted if Act done Without Malicious Intent  ||  Ker. HC: No Liability on RTO to Pay Compensation if Vehicle Owner Fails to get it Insured  ||  Guj. HC: Elected Members Must Not Disrepute the Institution to Which they are Elected  ||  All. HC: Scheme of A&C Act Put no Limitation for Application of Doctrine of Severability to an Award  ||  Kar. HC: Apprehension of Not Getting a Fair Trial is Required to Seek Transfer of Case  ||  Ker. HC: Not Granting Divorce Despite Mutual Consent Amounts to Cruelty  ||  Tel. HC: Elders in the House Can’t Decide Custody of Child  ||  All. HC: Gravity of Misconduct and Past Conduct Relevant to be Considered by Disciplinary Authority  ||  P&H HC Issues Guidelines on Proclamation u/s 82 CrPC  ||  SC: Can File Complaint Under Repealed FERA Provisions During Sunset Period After Enforcement of FEMA    

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


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.


Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2023 - All Rights Reserved