https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=411538 For FOR destination sales, where risk and title remained with the seller until delivery at the buyer's premises, that premises constituted the place of removal and outward freight up to that point qualified as input service under the CENVAT Credit Rules, so CENVAT credit was admissible. The credit entries having been disclosed in ER-1 returns and the dispute turning on interpretation of the input service and place of removal definitions, no suppression or intent to evade duty was shown; the extended period of limitation was therefore not invocable. The disallowance of credit and the demand based on extended limitation were held unsustainable. en-us Wed, 25 Aug 2021 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 27 Aug 2021 08:30:42 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=411538 For FOR destination sales, where risk and title remained with the seller until delivery at the buyer's premises, that premises constituted the place of removal and outward freight up to that point qualified as input service under the CENVAT Credit Rules, so CENVAT credit was admissible. The credit entries having been disclosed in ER-1 returns and the dispute turning on interpretation of the input service and place of removal definitions, no suppression or intent to evade duty was shown; the extended period of limitation was therefore not invocable. The disallowance of credit and the demand based on extended limitation were held unsustainable. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 25 Aug 2021 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=411538