TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (3) TMI 993
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s. Shirin Khajuria, Adv. Mr. Zohib, Adv. Ms. Ooja Sharma, Adv Ms. Sanskriti Bhardwaj, Adv. Ms. Ayushi Gaur, Adv. Mr. B. Krishna Prasad, AOR Ms. Anil Katiyar, Adv. Mr. Arup Banerjee, AOR Mr. Sarbendra Kumar, Adv. Mr. Prakash Sharma, Adv. Mr. Chava Badrinath Babu, Adv. Mr. V.V. Rayudu, Adv. Mr. Rameshwar Prasad Goyal, AOR Mr. Kartik K., Adv. Mr. Praveen Kumar, AOR Mr. S.B. Sharma, Adv. Ms. Babita S., Adv. For the Respondent : Mr. S. Bagaria, Sr. Adv. Mr. V. Lakshmi Kumaran, Adv. Mr. Aditya Bhattacharya, Adv. Mr. Ajit Kumar, Adv. Mr. Victor Das, Adv. Ms. Apeksha Mehta, Adv. Mr. M.P. Devanath, Adv. Mr. R. Parthasarthy, Adv. Mr. S.J. Amith, Adv. Mr. Purushottham Sharma Tripathi, Adv. Mr. Mukesh Kumar Singh, Adv. Mr. R.C. Prakash, Adv. Dr. (Mrs. ) Vipin Gupta, AOR Mr. Sumit Goel, Adv. Mr. Abhiram Naik, Adv. Ms. Tanuj Agarwal, Adv. M/S. Parekh & Co., AOR Ms. Vanita Bhargava, Adv. Mr. Abhisaar Bairagi, Adv. M/S. Khaitan & Co., AOR Mr. Ranjit B. Raut, Adv. Mrs. Bina Gupta, AOR Ms. Surbhi Kapoor, Adv. Mr. Nikhil Swami, Adv. Ms. Divya Swami, Adv. Mrs. Prabha Swami, AOR Mr. B. Krishna Prasad, AOR Mr. Anand Sukumar, Adv. Mr. S. Sukumaran, Adv. Mr. Bhupesh Kumar Pathak, Adv. Ms. Meera Mathur,....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... used by a provider of taxable service for providing an output service; or (ii) used by the manufacturer, whether directly or indirectly, in or in relation to the manufacture of final products and clearance of final products from the place of removal, and includes services used in relation to setting up, modernization, renovation or repairs of a factory, premises of provider of output service or an office relating to such factory or premises, advertisement or sales, promotion, market research, storage upto the place of removal, procurement of inputs, activities relating to business, such as accounting, auditing, financing, recruitment and quality control, coaching and training, computer networking, credit rating, share registry and security, inward transportation of inputs or capital goods and outward transportation upto the place of removal;" The Full Bench of CESTAT in M/s. ABB Limited case, which has been upheld by the Karnataka High Court as mentioned above, has interpreted the aforesaid Rule observing that it is in two parts. In the first part, input service is defined with the expression "means" and in that context input service is defined as any service used by a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....x again paid from the place of depot to the place of customers, the CENVAT credit thereof was not claimed and there is no dispute about it. The aforesaid approach of the Full Bench of the CESTAT, as affirmed by the High Court, appears to be perfectly correct and we do not find any error therein. For the sake of convenience, we would like to reproduce the following discussion contained in the judgment of the High Court. "30. The definition of 'input service' contains both the word 'means' and 'includes', but not 'means and includes'. The portion of the definition to which the word means applies has to be construed restrictively as it is exhaustive. However, the portion of the definition to which the word includes applies has to be construed liberally as it is extensive. The exhaustive portion of the definition of 'input service' deals with service used by the manufacturer, whether directly or indirectly, in or in relation to the manufacture of final products. It also includes clearance of final products from the place of removal. Therefore, services received or rendered by the manufacturer from the place of removal till it reaches ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....to the customer. Therefore, 'input service' includes not only the inward transportation of inputs or capital goods but also includes outward transportation of the final product upto the place of removal. Therefore, in the later portion of the definition, an outer limit is prescribed for outward transportation, i.e., up to the place of removal. As mentioned above, the expression used in the aforesaid Rule is "from the place of removal". It has to be from the place of removal upto a certain point. Therefore, tax paid on the transportation of the final product from the place of removal upto the first point, whether it is depot or the customer, has to be allowed. Our view gets support from the amendment which has been carried out by the rule making authority w.e.f. 01.04.2008 vide Notification No. 10/2008CE(NT) dated 01.03.2008 whereby the aforesaid expression "from the place of removal" is substituted by "upto the place of removal". Thus from 01.04.2008, with the aforesaid amendment, the CENVAT credit is available only upto the place of removal whereas as per the amended Rule from the place of removal which has to be upto either the place of depot or the place of custome....