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>Appellant's Cenvat credit claim on GTA services pre-01.04.2008 remanded for compliance review.</h1> <h3>Phillips Carbon Black Limited Versus C.C.E. & S.T. -Vadodara-II</h3> The appellant's claim for cenvat credit on outward GTA services prior to 01.04.2008 was considered by the Member (Judicial). It was observed that the ... CENVAT Credit - input services - outward GTA services - place of removal - prior to 01.04.2008 - HELD THAT:- Prior to 01.04.2008, the services related to removal of the goods was “from the place of removal” which was replaced as amended with effect from 01.04.2008 as “up to the place of removal”. Therefore, the Cenvat Credit prima facie is available in case of outward transportation for the services availed from the place of removal up to the customers place - Learned Authorized Representative is also relied upon that Board has prescribed certain conditions for allowing credit which need to be satisfied. Since the adjudicating authority has not verified the fact that, whether the said conditions of Board Circular have been complied with or not, the matter needs to be reconsidered. Appeal deserves to be remanded to the Adjudicating Authority for passing a fresh order after verifying the documents to ascertain that whether the appellant has fulfilled the condition as prescribed in the Board’s Circular No. 97/8/2007-ST dated 23.08.2007 - Appeal allowed by way of remand. Issues involved:Whether the appellant is entitled to cenvat credit in respect of outward GTA for the period prior to 01.04.2008.Analysis:The appellant argued that prior to 01.04.2008, cenvat credit on outward GTA was available as the definition of input service related to the removal of inputs was 'from the place of removal.' They cited various judgments to support their claim. On the other hand, the Revenue contended that even before 01.04.2008, certain criteria were required to be fulfilled for allowing cenvat credit on outward GTA, as per Board Circular No. 97/8/2007-ST. The Revenue cited relevant judgments to support their argument.The Member (Judicial) carefully considered both sides' submissions and reviewed the records. It was noted that the definition of services related to the removal of goods was changed from 'from the place of removal' to 'up to the place of removal' with effect from 01.04.2008. Therefore, prima facie, cenvat credit is available for outward transportation services from the place of removal up to the customer's place. However, it was also acknowledged that certain conditions prescribed by the Board needed to be satisfied for allowing the credit. As the adjudicating authority had not verified whether the conditions of the Board Circular had been complied with, the matter was deemed to require reconsideration.Consequently, the impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was remanded to the Adjudicating Authority for a fresh decision after verifying the documents to ensure compliance with the conditions specified in the Board's Circular No. 97/8/2007-ST. The Adjudicating Authority was instructed to consider the judgments cited by both parties in reaching a decision. The appeal was allowed by way of remand to the Adjudicating Authority.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
