TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (7) TMI 14
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....th the help of Ld. AR. 2. Short issue involved in this appeal relates to admissibility of Cenvat credit on outward transportation after 1.4.2008. 3. Ld. AR submits that the issue is squarely covered by the judgement of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CCE & ST vs. Ultratech Cement Pvt.Ltd.-2018 (9) GSTL 337 (SC). 4. After hearing Ld.AR and perusing the record, I find that the issue pertains to demand of Cenvat Credit of service tax paid on outward freight charges for transportation of the goods from the factory/depot of the appellant to the customer's premises. The period involved is from 1.3.2012 to 31.13.2016. As rightly pointed out by the Ld.AR, the issue of admissibility of Cenvat credit on outward transportation for the pe....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ransportation of goods, i.e. from the factory to customer's premises, is not covered within the ambit of Rule 2(l)(i) of Rules, 2004. Whereas the word 'from' is the indicator of starting point, the expression 'upto' signifies the terminating point, putting an end to the transport journey. We, therefore, find that the Adjudicating Authority was right in interpreting Rule 2(l) in the following manner : "... The input service has been defined to mean any service used by the manufacturer whether directly or indirectly and also includes, interalia, services used in relation to inward transportation of inputs or export goods and outward transportation upto the place of removal. The two clauses in the definition of 'input services' ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....in the definition states that the service in regard to which credit of tax is sought, should be used in or in relation to clearance of the final products from the place of removal. The definition of input services should be read as a whole and should not be fragmented in order to avail ineligible credit. Once the clearances have taken place, the question of granting input service stage credit does not arise. Transportation is an entirely different activity from manufacture and this position remains settled by the judgment of Honorable Supreme Court in the cases of Bombay Tyre International - 1983 (14) E.L.T. 1896 (S.C.), Indian Oxygen Ltd. - 1988 (36) E.L.T. 723 (S.C.) and Baroda Electric Meters - 1997 (94) E.L.T. 13 (S.C.). The post remova....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n mind that Board's Circular dated August 23, 2007 was issued in clarification of the definition of 'input service' as existed on that date i.e. it related to unamended definition. Relevant portion of the said circular is as under : "ISSUE : Up to what stage a manufacturer/consignor can take credit on the service tax paid on goods transport by road? COMMENTS: This issue has been examined in great detail by the CESTAT in the case of M/s. Gujarat Ambuja Cements Ltd. vs. CCE, Ludhiana [2007 (6) S.T.R. 249 (Tri-D)]. In this case, CESTAT has made the following observations :- "the post sale transport of manufactured goods is not an input for the manufacturer/consignor. The two clauses in the definition of 'input servic....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... account the facts of an individual case and the applicable provisions. The phrase 'place of removal' has not been defined in CENVAT Credit Rules. In terms of sub-rule (t) of Rule 2 of the said rules, if any words or expressions are used in the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 and are not defined therein but are defined in the Central Excise Act, 1944 or the Finance Act, 1994, they shall have the same meaning for the CENVAT Credit Rules as assigned to them in those Acts. The phrase 'place of removal' is defined under Section 4 of the Central Excise Act, 1944. It states that, - "place of removal" means - (i) a factory or any other place or premises of production or manufacture of the excisable goods; (ii) a warehouse or a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e claimant of such credit that the sale and the transfer of property in goods (in terms of the definition as under Section 2 of the Central Excise Act, 1944 as also in terms of the provisions under the Sale of Goods Act, 1930) occurred at the said place." 11.As can be seen from the reading of the aforesaid portion of the circular, the issue was examined after keeping in mind judgments of CESTAT in Gujarat Ambuja Cement Ltd., 2007 (6) S.T.R. 249 (Tribunal) and M/s. Ultratech Cement Ltd., 2007 (6) S.T.R. 364 (Tri.- Ahd.). Those judgments, obviously, dealt with unamended Rule 2(l) of Rules, 2004. The three conditions which were mentioned explaining the 'place of removal' as defined under Section 4 of the Act, there is no quarrel upto ....