Appellant entitled to Cenvat Credit on Outward Transit Insurance for Excisable Goods sold on FOR basis.

The appellant was entitled to Cenvat Credit on Outward Transit Insurance for Excisable Goods sold on FOR basis. The Member found that the sale condition was evident from the invoices, LR copies, and CA Certificate, indicating the sale was on FOR basis. The Member referenced previous judgments supporting the appellant's claim and distinguished contrary judgments. The Member concluded that the appellant's entitlement to credit was valid, setting aside the previous decision and allowing the appeal.

---

---

Issues Involved:
Entitlement of Cenvat Credit on Outward Transit Insurance for Excisable Goods sold on FOR basis.

Analysis:
1. The issue revolved around the entitlement of the appellant for Cenvat Credit on Outward Transit Insurance for Excisable Goods sold by them. The original authority allowed the credit based on the documents such as invoices, LR copies, and CA certificates, confirming the sale on FOR basis. However, the revenue contested this decision, claiming that no sale contract was submitted to prove the nature of the sale. The Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the revenue's appeal based on the absence of a sale contract, leading to the present appeal by the appellant.

2. The appellant's counsel argued that the nature of the sale being on FOR basis was evident from the invoices, CA certificates, and LR copies submitted. They cited a previous Tribunal judgment in their favor and relied on cases involving ULTRATECH CEMENT LTD and SANGHI INDUSTRIED LTD, which were upheld by the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court, to support their claim.

3. The revenue's representative reiterated the findings of the impugned order and referred to a Supreme Court judgment in the case of ULTRATECH CEMENT LTD, emphasizing that credit is not admissible when it is not a case of "upto removal." Additionally, they cited a judgment from the Hyderabad bench of the tribunal in the case of NCL INDUSTRIES to support their argument.

4. The Hon'ble Member (Judicial) carefully examined the submissions from both sides and reviewed the records. It was observed that the original authority had allowed the credit after verifying the sale invoices, LR copies, and CA Certificate, which clearly indicated the sale was on FOR basis. The invoices explicitly stated the sale condition and the coverage of risk up to the destination, with no indication that the outward transit insurance was paid by the consignee. The Member concluded that the sale being on FOR basis was evident from the invoices themselves, making any additional contract unnecessary to establish the nature of the sale. The Member also referenced previous judgments involving ULTRATECH CEMENT LTD and SANGHI INDUSTRIED LTD, where the credit was allowed for similar transactions.

4.1 The Member further distinguished the judgment cited by the revenue's representative from the Hyderabad bench, noting that it did not consider the circular issued by the board post the Supreme Court judgment in ULTRATECH CEMENT LTD. The Member highlighted that the tribunal is bound by the jurisdictional High Court's judgment, which upheld the decisions in the cases of ULTRATECH CEMENT LTD and SANGHI INDUSTRIED LTD, thereby emphasizing the validity of the appellant's claim.

5. Ultimately, based on the analysis and legal precedents, the Member concluded that the appellant was entitled to the Cenvat Credit on the services of Outward Transit Insurance, setting aside the impugned order and allowing the appeal.

---