57/2012 CE dated March 15, 2012 allowed the appeal and set aside the Order in Original holding that assessee is eligible for availment of service tax paid on GTA service on the outward freight from the factory to the customers premises as per the Boards Circular 97/8/2007 Service Tax dated August 23, 2007.
After hearing, the Adjudicating Authority passed Order in Original dated August 22, 2011 holding that once the final products are cleared from the factory premises, extending the credit beyond the point of clearance of final product is number permissible under Cenvat Credit Rules and post clearance use of services in transport of manufactured goods cannot be input service for the manufacture of final product.
Accordingly, the Adjudicating Authority passed the order as under Demanding the irregular Cenvat credit availed on outward transportation of goods amounting to Rs.25,66,131/ under Rule 14 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 read with Section 11A of Central Excise Act, 1944 Demanding interest under Rule 14 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 read with Section 11AB of Central Excise Act, 1944 read with Section 75 of the Finance Act, 1994 Did number order for initiation of action under Rule 15 1 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 read with Rule 25 of Central Excise Rules, 2002 Imposed penalty of Rs.25,66,131/ under Rule 15 3 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 Imposed penalty of Rs.1,00,000/ under Rule 25 of Central Excise Rules, 2002.
The Commissioner Appeals vide Order in Appeal No.
25,66,131/ and the assessee was called upon to show cause as to why the said amount be number recovered and penalty be number imposed.
It was further mentioned that the total Cenvat Credit claimed was in the sum of Rs.
Accordingly, the Office of the Commissioner of Central Excise Bangalore II Commissionerate issued show cause numberice dated February 3, 2011 to the assessee inter alia stating that on scrutiny of ER 1 return submitted by the assessee for the period January, 2010 to June, 2010, it was numbericed that the assessee have wrongly availed the Cenvat Credit of Service Tax paid on outward transportation of goods from the factory to the Customers premises, inasmuch as the Goods Transport Agency Service used for the purpose of outward transportation of the goods from factory to customers premises is number input service within the ambit of Rule 2 l ii of the Rules, 2004.
With respect to fulfillment of requirement of Circular dated August 23, 2007, it was held that the assessee has number produced any documentary evidence to prove that companyditions laid down vide Circular dated August 23, 2007 has been fulfilled.
The assessee during the period from January, 2010 to June, 2010 availed Cenvat Credit of service tax paid on outward transportation of goods through a transport agency from their premises to the customers premises.
24/2011 dated August 22, 2011, respondent assessee preferred an appeal before Commissioner Appeals .
Aggrieved by the Order in Original No.
Accordingly, appeal was filed before the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT by the Revenue which was rejected vide judgment dated May 1, 2015.
Further, the Adjudicating Authority held that CBEC vide its Circular No.
Further appeal to the High Court preferred by the assessee has met the same fate as the said appeal has been dismissed by the High Court of Karnataka vide its judgment dated June 29, 2016, which is the subject matter of the present appeal.
place of removal in terms of Rule 2 l of the Rules and as such cannot be companysidered as input service to avail Cenvat credit.
The assessee submitted its reply to the show cause numberice companytesting the position companytained therein.
It was number the turn of the Revenue to feel aggrieved by the order.
97/8/2007 ST dated August 23, 2007 has clarified the definition of place of removal.
According to the appellant Revenue, the transport agency service used by the assessee for transportation of their final product from their premises to customers premises cannot be companysidered to have been used directly or indirectly in relation to clearance of goods from the factory viz.,
AAACL6442LEM014.
The assessee is also availing the benefit of Cenvat Credit facility under the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 Rules, 2004 for short .
The assesseeherein gets finished goods cement from its parent unit on stock transfer basis and sells the same in bulk form and packed bags.
K. SIKRI, J. The companye issue involved in the present case is with regard to the admissibility or otherwise of the Cenvat Credit on Goods Transport Agency service availed for transport of goods from the place of removal to buyers premises.
This issue has arisen in the following factual background The respondent M s. Ultratech Cement Ltd. hereinafter referred to as the assessee is involved in packing and clearing forwarding of Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by ASHWANI KUMAR cement classifiable under Chapter sub heading 25232910 of Central Date 2018.02.01 164438 IST Reason Excise Tariff Act, 1985, with Central Excise Registration No.
