Tribunal grants Cenvat Credit for Courier Service usage in manufacturing and goods removal

The Tribunal allowed the appeal, holding that the appellant was entitled to Cenvat Credit for Courier Service. The Tribunal emphasized that the admissibility of the credit was based on the usage of Courier Service in manufacturing and goods removal, rather than the return of goods to the factory. The impugned order denying the credit was set aside, affirming the appellant's entitlement to Cenvat Credit for Courier Service.

---

---

Issues:
1. Entitlement to Cenvat Credit in respect of Courier Service.

Analysis:
The case revolved around the question of whether the appellant was entitled to Cenvat Credit for Courier Service. The appellant, represented by Shri S. J. Vyas, argued that the Courier Service was utilized for dispatching samples of raw materials and capital goods for various purposes like testing and repairs. A Chartered Accountant's Certificate supported this claim. The appellant cited relevant judgments, including Modern Petrofils Dty Div & Ors. Vs. CCE 2017 (9) TMI 206 and Haldyn Glass Ltd. & Ors. Vs. CCE 2017 (8) TMI 1217, to bolster their argument.

On the other hand, Shri Govind Jha, Ld. Superintendent (AR) representing the Revenue, contended that the Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the denial of Cenvat Credit based on the absence of proof that the goods sent via Courier Service returned to the factory. However, the Tribunal noted that the core issue was the admissibility of Cenvat Credit for Courier Service, not the return of goods. The Tribunal consistently held the view that Cenvat Credit for Courier Service is permissible when used in relation to the manufacture and removal of goods, as supported by the judgments referenced by the appellant.

After considering both sides' arguments and examining the records, the Tribunal concluded that the appellant was indeed entitled to Cenvat Credit for Courier Service. The Tribunal found the argument regarding the return of goods irrelevant to the admissibility of Cenvat Credit for Courier Service. Consequently, the impugned order denying the credit was set aside, and the appeal was allowed.

In conclusion, the Tribunal's decision affirmed the appellant's entitlement to Cenvat Credit for Courier Service, emphasizing that the usage of Courier Service in manufacturing and goods removal justified the credit, irrespective of whether the goods returned to the factory.

---