2012 (7) TMI 354

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ufacture paper chargeable to central excise duty. The dispute in this case is as to whether during the period from February, 2005 to May, 2007 they were eligible for cenvat credit of service tax paid on outward transportation of the goods from the factory to the customer s premises. According to the respondent, their place of removal is buyer s place, as their sales are on FOR destination basis an....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....peals), the present appeal has been filed by the revenue.   3. Though notice for hearing of this matter has been sent to the respondent, today when the matter was called none representing the respondent. We find that on earlier occasions for hearings dated 17.2.2011, 26.07.2011 and 29.12.2011 notices of hearing were sent to the respondent at the address SCO No. 18-19, Ist Floor, Sector-8-C....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he factory premises, warehouse where the excisable goods are stored or the depot / premises of consignment agent of the respondent from where goods are sold. Ld. AR submits that the place of delivery to the customer can not be the place of removal. It is pleaded that even if the customer s premises is treated as the place of removal, there is no finding by CCE(Appeals) that the sales were on FOR d....