TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (5) TMI 771
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e Respondent : Shri N. Jagdish, Superintendent (AR) ORDER Order Per : B.S.V.MURTHY The appellant is engaged in manufacturing of cement and clinker. The appellant is availing the benefit of CENVAT credit under CENVAT Credit Rules 2004 in respect of inputs and input services. The appellants were also taking CENVAT credit of service tax paid by them as receiver of services in respect o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... learned Commissioner in the impugned order for confirming the demand is that the invoice was prepared in the factory and not at the buyers premises and therefore buyers premises cannot be considered as place of removal and the factory has to be considered as the place of removal. Further he has also taken a view that since the goods were handed over to the transporter, it cannot....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....2(146) ELT 31 (SC)] and Madras Cements Ltd. Vs. CCE, Bangalore [2012(27) STR 470 (Tri. Bang.)]. 5. We have considered the submissions made by both sides. We have also gone through the invoices produced before us. We find that the decision of the Hon ble Supreme Court may not be applicable to the facts of this case since in that case, factory gate was admittedly the place of removal an....