TaxTMI Login
AI Drafter - (New and Powerful) ✕
Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Just a moment...
AI Drafter - (New and Powerful) ✕ Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: (i) whether outward freight used for transporting goods under FOR destination contracts up to the buyer's premises qualified as input service for CENVAT credit; and (ii) whether the extended period of limitation could be invoked.
Issue (i): whether outward freight used for transporting goods under FOR destination contracts up to the buyer's premises qualified as input service for CENVAT credit.
Analysis: Rule 3 of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 permits credit of service tax paid on input service, and Rule 2(l) includes services used in relation to clearance of final products upto the place of removal and outward transportation upto the place of removal. The expression "place of removal" is to be read with the definition under the Central Excise Act, 1944 and, on the facts, the contracts were FOR destination sales. The goods remained at the seller's risk during transit, the buyer could reject the goods on inspection, and title and possession were held to remain with the seller until delivery at the buyer's premises. On that basis, the buyer's premises constituted the place of removal and the seller was the recipient of the freight service.
Conclusion: outward freight up to the buyer's premises was an eligible input service and CENVAT credit was admissible; this issue was decided in favour of the assessee.
Issue (ii): whether the extended period of limitation could be invoked.
Analysis: The credit entries were disclosed in the periodic ER-1 returns, and the dispute turned on interpretation of the definition of input service and place of removal. In the absence of suppression or misrepresentation with intent to evade duty, the longer limitation period was not available to the Department.
Conclusion: the extended period of limitation was not invocable; this issue was decided in favour of the assessee.
Final Conclusion: the disallowance of CENVAT credit and the demand founded on extended limitation were unsustainable, and the appeal succeeded.
Ratio Decidendi: for FOR destination sales, where property and risk remain with the seller until delivery at the buyer's premises, outward freight up to that destination is input service for CENVAT purposes, and limitation cannot be extended absent suppression or intent to evade.
TaxTMI 
