2019 (9) TMI 109

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....dit of tax paid on 'goods transport agency service' utilized by them for outward transportation for the period prior to 1st April 2008. The original authority had denied the entitlement to, and consequently ordered recovery of, Rs. 1,66,87,116/- on the ground that freight had been shown separately without inclusion in the assessable value for such goods that were cleared to the domestic market and that, in relation to exports, the port could not be accepted as 'place of removal.' 2. According to Learned Counsel for the appellant, the original authority, besides exceeding the scope of adjudication delineated by the frame work of the show cause notice which was restricted to 'place of removal', has wrongly concluded that the freight paid w....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ntral Excise, Chennai [2007 (218) ELT 103 (Tri.-Chennai)] that '8.2 Thus, if the meaning of "clearance" in the definition of "input service" is deciphered from the relevant provisions of the Central Excise Act and the rules framed there under or from the common parlance, the only possible view is that clearance of final products from the place of removal does not include outward transportation of the goods to customers' premises. Such transportation starts from where clearance ends and cannot be held to be a service used directly or indirectly in the clearance of final products from the place of removal. This appears to be the view taken by the learned President sitting single in the case of NHK Springs (supra). In the case of Guja....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e the place of removal is not the factory. Where the place of removal of final products is, say, a depot, transportation of the goods from factory to the depot is an input service as it is used in relation to clearance of the goods from the depot. Without such transportation, the final products cannot be cleared from the depot. On the other hand, obviously, such transportation has nothing to do with the anterior process viz. ''manufacture" which was completed in the factory, and hence cannot be said to be used in relation to the manufacture of the goods. Therefore, the word "and" used in Rule 2(l) (ii) has got to be understood in the disjunctive sense, which is compatible with the differences between 'manufacture' and 'clearance' as also wi....