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

....n'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 till the delivery of the goods at the purchaser&#....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....SSUE: 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 transportation upto the place of removal are to be treated as input service. ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....les, 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 or any other place or premises from where the excisable goods are to be sold after their clearance from the factor....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....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 in the aforesaid definition. Once it is accepted that place of removal is the factory premises of the assessee, outward transpor....