Tribunal allows Cenvat credit on FOR sales, defining place of removal as customer's premises

The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the Order-in-Original, and confirmed the legitimacy of the Cenvat credit on outward transportation of goods on Freight on Road (FOR) basis. The Tribunal determined that the place of removal for goods sold on FOR basis is the customer's premises, based on contractual terms and legal precedents, allowing the assessee-Appellants to avail the Cenvat credit on Service Tax paid on freight charges for FOR sales.

---

---

Issues Involved:
Cenvat credit on outward transportation of goods on Freight on Road (FOR) basis.

Analysis:
The appeal was filed against the Order-in-Original passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise, regarding the Cenvat credit on outward transportation of goods on FOR basis from factory gate/depot to customers’ premises during the period from June 2008 to September 2015. The assessee-Appellants, engaged in the manufacture of Cement, contended that they sell products on FOR basis, where freight charges are included in the assessable value, excise duty is discharged on the assessable value inclusive of freight charges, and property in goods passes to customers on delivery at their premises. The place of removal was argued to be the customer's premises under Section 4(3)(c) of the Central Excise Act, justifying the Cenvat credit availed. The Tribunal considered an identical issue in the assessee-Appellants' own case and referred to previous judgments, including the Chhattisgarh High Court's ruling that the place of removal for FOR sales is the customer's premises. Based on the evidence and pleadings, the Tribunal concluded that the sales were on FOR basis, allowing the appeal and setting aside the impugned order.

The Tribunal heard arguments from both sides and reviewed the material on record, noting the previous decision in the assessee-Appellants' case and the Chhattisgarh High Court's ruling on the place of removal for FOR sales. The Tribunal emphasized that when sales are on FOR basis, with the risk in goods borne by the manufacturer until delivery at the customer's premises, and the composite value includes freight, the place of removal is not the factory gate but the customer's premises. Considering the evidence presented, including certificates from customers, the Tribunal concluded that the assessee legitimately availed Cenvat credit on Service Tax paid on freight charges for FOR sales. Consequently, the impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed.

In conclusion, the Tribunal's decision revolved around the interpretation of the place of removal for goods sold on FOR basis, determining whether Cenvat credit on outward transportation of goods was legitimate. By analyzing the transactional facts, contractual terms, and legal precedents, the Tribunal found in favor of the assessee-Appellants, allowing the appeal and confirming the legitimacy of the Cenvat credit availed on freight charges for FOR sales.

---