2018 (7) TMI 428

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Appeals) has relied upon the decision of Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka in the case of CCEST, LTU, Bangalore v. A.B.B. Ltd. - 2011 (23) S.T.R. 97 (Kar). 2. The issue went up to Hon'ble Supreme Court and the Hon'ble Apex Court in Civil Appeals filed by the Revenue held as under:- "5) We may also refer to Circular No. 97/8/2007-ST dated August 23, 2007 issued by the Central Board of Excise and Customs (CBEC) (hereinafter referred to as the 'Board') as per which the definition of 'input service' was clarified and the Circular also provided the conditions which are to be satisfied to cover the case within 'place of removal'. The three conditions contained in the circular are (i) regarding ownership of the goods ti....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....3, 2007, relevant portion whereof 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) STR 249 Tri-D] = 2007-TIOL-539-CESTAT-DEL. In this case, CESTAT has made the following observations:- "thepost sale transport of manufactured goods is not an input for the manufacturer/consignor. The two clauses in the definition of 'input services' take care to circumscribe input credit by stating that service used in relation to the clearance from the place of removal and service used for outward trans....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ule 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 any other place or premises wherein the excisable goods have been permitted to be stored without payment of duty ; (iii) a depot, premises of a consignmentagent o....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....1944 as also in terms of the provisions under the Sale of Goods Act, 1930) occurred at the said place. 8) 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. and M/s. Ultratech Cement Ltd. Those judgments, obviously, dealt with unamended Rule 2(l) of Rules, 2004. The three conditions which were mentioned explaining the 'place of removal' are defined in Section 4 of the Act. It is not the case of the Department that the three conditions laid down in the said Circular are not satisfied. If we accept the contention of the Department, it would nullify the effect of the word 'from' the place of removal appearing....