TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Tribunal overturns credit disallowance on GTA service, emphasizes place of removal significance</h1> <h3>M/s. New India Associates Versus Commissioner of GST & Central Excise Puducherry</h3> M/s. New India Associates Versus Commissioner of GST & Central Excise Puducherry - TMI Issues: Disallowance of credit on GTA service, determination of place of removal for eligibility of credit on freight charges.Analysis:1. The case involved the disallowance of credit on GTA service by the authorities due to the appellant availing CENVAT credit on service tax paid on outward transportation. The appellant contended that as goods were sold on FOR basis, the place of removal should be considered as the buyer's premises, making them eligible for the credit.2. The appellant's counsel referred to a Supreme Court judgment and a circular by the Board to support their argument. They highlighted that Circular F. No. 116/23/2018-CX3 clarified that in cases of sale on FOR basis, the place of removal is the buyer's premises. The appellant requested a remand for reconsideration based on this circular.3. The respondent supported the findings of the impugned order and emphasized the need for the appellant to provide documents proving the buyer's premises as the place of removal.4. The Tribunal considered the conflicting judgments of the Supreme Court in Ultra Tech Cement Ltd. and Roofit Industries Ltd. The Tribunal noted that in cases of sale on FOR basis, where the transaction occurs at the buyer's premises, the place of removal is deemed to be the buyer's premises as per the circular issued by the Board.5. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order and allowed the appeal by remanding the matter to the adjudicating authority. The adjudicating authority was directed to determine the place of removal to assess the eligibility of credit on GTA service, considering the circular by the Board and a previous decision of the Tribunal in a similar case. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of correctly determining the place of removal for such cases.
TaxTMI 