Commissioner, Central Excise & Service ... vs M/S Industrial Solvents & Chemicals ...

Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal20 February 2015

CitationAppeal No.E/164/2010-SM; E/CROSS/78/2010

Ratio decidendi

The rule this decision rests on

The eligibility of CENVAT credit on service tax paid for outward transportation of finished goods from the place of removal up to the buyer's premises is governed by the rule laid down by the Gujarat High Court in Commissioner of C.E. & C. v. Parth Poly Wooven Pvt. Ltd. and Central Excise v. Inductotherm India Pvt. Ltd.: GTA service used to transport finished goods from the place of removal up to the buyer's premises is eligible for CENVAT credit during the material period. The Tribunal, bound by that binding authority, rejects the Revenue's appeal on this point.

Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.

Judgment

As delivered

In The Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate TribunalWest Zonal Bench At Ahmedabad

Appeal No.E/164/2010-SM; E/CROSS/78/2010 [Arising out of OIA No.KS/243/SRT-II/2009, dt.29.10.2009, passed by Commissioner of Central Excise & Customs (Appeals), Surat-II]

Commissioner, Central Excise & Service Tax, Surat-II Appellant

M/s Industrial Solvents & Chemicals Pvt.Ltd. Respondent

Represented by:

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Shukla, A.R. For Respondent: Shri Rahul Gajera, Advocate

For approval and signature:

Honble Mr. P.K. Das, Member (Judicial)

1. Whether Press Reporters may be allowed to see the No Order for publication as per Rule 27 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982?

2. Whether it should be released under Rule 27 of the No CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982 for publication in any authoritative report or not?

3. Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of Seen the order?

4. Whether order is to be circulated to the Departmental Yes authorities?

CORAM:

HONBLE MR. P.K. DAS, MEMBER (JUDICIAL)

Date of Hearing/Decision:20.02.2015

Order No. A/10155 / 2015, dt.20.02.2015

Per: P.K. Das

1. Revenue filed this appeal against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals), whereby the adjudication order was set aside.

2. After hearing both the sides and on perusal of the records, I find that the issue involved in this case is eligibility of the CENVAT Credit of service tax paid on outward transportation of final product upto the customers place for the period from January 2005 to April 2006 and July 2006 to March 2007. Honble Gujarat High Court in the following decisions held that the GTA service used for transportation of the finished goods from the place of removal upto the place premises of the buyer would be eligible for CENVAT Credit during the material period:-

a) Commissioner of C.E. & C. Vs Parth Poly Wooven Pvt. Ltd 2012 (25) STR 4 (Guj.)

b) Central Exice Vs Inductotherm India Pvt. Ltd 2014 (36) STR 994 (Guj.)

3. In view of the above decision, I do not find merit in the appeal filed by the Revenue. Accordingly, the appeal filed by the Revenue is rejected. The Cross Objection gets disposed of.

(Dictated & Pronounced in Court)

(P.K. Das) Member (Judicial)

cbb 2

This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.

Research this judgment with Miss Lucy

Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.

Try Miss Lucy free