2019 (7) TMI 1166

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... paid on Goods Transport Agency Services used for outward transportation of finished goods from the factory to their customer's premises. According to department, the said credit is not eligible as the place of removal is the factory gate. Show-cause notices were issued for different period from Apr.'12 to Mar.'16, proposing to recover the wrongly availed credit along with interest and also for imposing penalties. After due process of law, the original authority vide separate Orders-in-Original confirmed the demand, interest and penalties. In appeal, the demand and interest was upheld by Commissioner (Appeals), however, the penalties were set aside. Aggrieved by such order, the appellants are now before this Tribunal. 3. On behalf of the....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the freight charges are incurred by the assessee, the place of removal has to be the buyer's premises. In the case of M/s. Ultratech Cement Ltd., Vs Commissioner of Central Excise, Kutch [Gandhidham] reported in 2019 (2) TMI 1487 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD, the Division Bench of the Tribunal has analysed this issue and held that the credit upto the buyer's premises would be eligible on GTA Services, when the freight has been cincluded in the assessable value. This Tribunal in the case of M/s. Genau Extrusions Ltd. Vs Commissioner of GST & CE vide Final Order No.40900/2019, dated 04.07.2019 also has followed the said decision to hold that the credit is eligible. 4. The learned Authorised Representative for the Revenue Shri M. Jagan Babu, AC (AR)....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ase of M/s. Ultratech Cement Ltd., reported in 2019 (2) TMI 1487 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD. This Tribunal in the case of M/s. Genau Extrusions Ltd. (supra) also has followed the same and held that the credit is eligible. The relevant paragraphs are extracted as under:- "6.1 On perusal of records as well as the purchase orders, it is seen that the sale is on F.O.R. basis. The authorities below have disallowed the credit holding that there is no evidence to establish that the sale is on F.O.R. basis. It is not necessary that there should be a separate contract for supply of goods. The parties can agree to the terms and conditions of the sale in the purchase orders itself. This becomes a concluded contract when the offer is accepted by the s....