2022 (7) TMI 12 - AT - Central Excise

CESTAT: C&F Agent Services Qualify as Admissible Input Services under Cenvat Credit Rules

NITCO LIMITED Versus C.C.E. & S.T. -DAMAN

The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Ahmedabad ruled that C&F Agent Services qualify as admissible input services under Rule 2(l) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, ... CENVAT Credit - input service - C&F Agent service - the service is provided upto at the place of removal - Rule 2(l) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 - HELD THAT:- The dispute is related to Cenvat on C&F Agent service. The C&F Agent service is provided for sale of the goods take place on behalf of the appellant. The sale of goods from the C&F Agent service is treated as sale by the appellant themselves, therefore, the C&F Agent services are received upto the place of removal. This issue has been considered in the appellant’s own case NITCO LIMITED VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE & ST, DAMAN [2022 (5) TMI 250 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD] where it was held that appellant is entitled for Cenvat credit on Storage and Warehousing Service at C&F Agent’s premises. The C&F Agent Service is admissible input service in the terms of Rule 2(l) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 - Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. Issues:- Entitlement of Cenvat Credit on C&F Agent ServicesDetailed Analysis:The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Ahmedabad addressed the issue of whether the appellant is entitled to Cenvat Credit on C&F Agent Services. The appellant's Chartered Accountant argued that as per Rule 2(l) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, all services provided up to the place of removal are admissible input services. He relied on a previous decision by the Tribunal in NITCO LIMITED Vs. COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE & ST, DAMAN-2022. On the other hand, the Revenue's Authorized Representative reiterated the findings of the impugned order.Upon careful consideration of the submissions and records, the Tribunal found that the dispute revolved around Cenvat on C&F Agent services. It was noted that the C&F Agent services were provided for the sale of goods on behalf of the appellant, with the sale being treated as if done by the appellant themselves. Consequently, the services were deemed to be received up to the place of removal. The Tribunal referenced the appellant's own case cited previously to support this conclusion.In light of the above analysis, the Tribunal concluded that C&F Agent Services qualify as admissible input services under Rule 2(l) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. Consequently, the impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed. The decision was dictated and pronounced in open court.