2016 (2) TMI 1184

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....alling under Tariff Sub Heading No. 32151990/32151920 of the First Schedule to Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. The assessee is receiver of Cargo Handling Service and GTA Service. The instant appeal is for the period 2005-06, 2006-07 and March, 2007 to December, 2007 and January 2008 to July, 2008. 3. The respondent-assessee claims to have availed Cenvat Credit of Rs. 19,45,023/- and Rs. 3,34,462/-, however the Assessing Officer was of the view that assessee is not entitled to the Cenvat Credit and it was observed by the Assessing Officer in the show cause notice followed by adjudication order that the assessee had made clearances of their final products from their factory gate and receiving the services of Safe Express Pvt. Ltd. and Spe....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ere preferred before the Commissioner (Appeals). The Commissioner(A) however accepted the contention canvassed by the assessee, took into consideration the Board Circular which clarified that even transporters who undertake transporation of only Cargo within assured and short time (designate themselves as Express Cargo Service) on "door to door basis" will come under the definition of courier agency and it was admitted fact that the respondent assessee had received such transportation services for speedy disposal of their final products to their customers after clearance from their factory and it was also admitted fact that Safe Express Pvt. Ltd. and Speedage Cargo Service from whom the assessee had received the services were registered und....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....o business, such as accounting etc. and taking into consideration the expression "clearance of final product from the place of removal has to be understood in the context of the preceding words, which refer to service used by the manufacturer in relation to the manufactuer and clearance of final products from the place of removal which itself may require input service and he contended that the same has not been proved at all by the respondentassessee. 7. We have heard the learned counsel for the Revenue and have perused the impugned order so also the order of the other authorities and in our view it is a finding of fact based on material on record and appreciation of evidence. It is an admitted fact that the respondentassessee had receiv....