TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
The Central Excise Act, 1944 provides levy of excise duty by different methods. In a recent judgment of Hon’ble Chhattisgarh High Court in the case of Ultratech Cement Ltd. vs. CCE 2014 (8) TMI 788 - CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT the Hon’ble Court held that place of removal is to be decided on facts and circumstances of each case. In this case, The Tribunal has held that in case where the excise duty is charged on the specified rate, then the place of removal is the gate of factory and not the premises of buyer. The core issue in this case was whether the definition of place of removal under Section 4(3) (c) would be applicable in case of valuation under Section 3(2) of the Central Excise Act, 2004 and Section 4A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 or not.
The Hon’ble High Court held that there is no provision in the Act or in the Rules or in any board circular of CBEC to hold that in case the duty is charged on the specified rate, then the place of removal will be the factory gate. It has also been held that in the absence of its meaning for other sections.
It has also been held that if under a contract, the sale takes place at the destination then that place may be the place of removal and service tax paid on the GTA- service for transporting the goods, upto destination might be available for taking cenvat credit. The Hon’ble Court has neglected the presumption and held that place of removal is factory gate of the manufacturer in case of duty charged on specified rate and remanded the matter back to original authority to decide afresh.
Regards,
Rishi Chanan, Advocate
Mob:-098158-28244