<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2019 (7) TMI 1166 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=383470</link>
    <description>Cenvat credit on GTA services used for outward transportation of finished goods to the buyer&#039;s premises is allowable where the sale is on F.O.R. terms and freight is included in the assessable value. The purchase orders, customer communications, invoices and pricing structure showed that the assessee bore freight and insurance, delivered the goods at the customer&#039;s premises, and paid excise duty on a value that embedded freight charges. On that basis, the buyer&#039;s premises were treated as the place of removal, so the restriction on credit beyond the place of removal did not apply. The disallowance of credit was therefore set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 18 Jul 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 25 Jul 2019 06:48:14 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=581031" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (7) TMI 1166 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=383470</link>
      <description>Cenvat credit on GTA services used for outward transportation of finished goods to the buyer&#039;s premises is allowable where the sale is on F.O.R. terms and freight is included in the assessable value. The purchase orders, customer communications, invoices and pricing structure showed that the assessee bore freight and insurance, delivered the goods at the customer&#039;s premises, and paid excise duty on a value that embedded freight charges. On that basis, the buyer&#039;s premises were treated as the place of removal, so the restriction on credit beyond the place of removal did not apply. The disallowance of credit was therefore set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 18 Jul 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=383470</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>