2009 (9) TMI 296 - AT - Service Tax

Tribunal rules in favor of appellant on Cenvat credit eligibility for service tax on freight charges

The Tribunal allowed the appeal regarding the eligibility of Cenvat credit for service tax paid on freight charges under the Goods Transport Agency ... Cenvat Credit-Input Services- The appellant was availing the Cenvat Credit relating to the service tax paid in respect of the freight charges under the category of Goods Transport Agency. A show cause notice issued to disallow the credit. In the light of the decision of ABB Ltd. v. CCE&ST 2009 -TMI - 34139 - CESTAT, BANGALORE, held that credit allowed set aside the order passed by commissioner and allow the appeal. Issues:- Cenvat credit eligibility for service tax paid on freight charges under Goods Transport Agency.Analysis:The appeal was filed against Order-in-Appeal No. 16/2007(T) CE, which proposed disallowance of Cenvat credit on service tax paid for freight charges under the category of Goods Transport Agency. The issue revolved around the interpretation of the definition of input service under rule 2(l)(ii) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, specifically regarding the words 'outward transportation up to the place of removal.' The impugned order confirmed the demand for payment/reversal of the credit, along with interest and penalty.The appellant appealed to the Commissioner (Appeals) but faced rejection, leading to the current appeal. Despite the absence of representation from the appellant, the Tribunal proceeded with the case due to the issue's relevance. The Tribunal considered the findings of the Commissioner (Appeals) reiterated by the learned DR, focusing on the Cenvat credit related to service tax on freight charges under the Goods Transport Agency category.Upon review of the facts and records, the Tribunal found that the issue at hand had already been decided in favor of the assessee by the Larger Bench of the Tribunal in the case of ABB Ltd. v. CCE&ST [2009] 21 STT 77 (Bang. - CESTAT). As the issue was squarely covered in favor of the appellant by the precedent set by the Larger Bench, the impugned order was deemed unsustainable and set aside. Consequently, the Tribunal allowed the appeal, following the decision of the Larger Bench, and granted any consequential relief deemed necessary.