TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (12) TMI 549
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... all the three appeals is identical and therefore all the three appeals are taken up together for discussion and disposal. For the sake of convenience, the facts of Appeal No. E/21046/2019 are taken. The details of the three appeals are given herein below: Sl. No. Appeal No. Order-in-Appeal No. & Date Duty (Rs.) Penalty (Rs.) 1 E/21046/2019 BEL-EXCUS-000-APP-MSC-035-2019-20 dated 30/05/2019 6,67,747/- 6,67,747/- 2 E/21047/2019 BEL-EXCUS-000-APP-MSC-038-2019-20 dated 30/05/2019 1,42,804/- 1,42,804/- 3 E/21048/2019 BEL-EXCUS-000-APP-MSC-033-2019-20 dated 30/05/2019 4,25,277/- 4,25,277/- 2. Briefly the facts of the present case are that the appellants are engaged in Cl Raw....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 4. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the impugned orders are not sustainable in law as the same has been passed without properly appreciating the definition of 'input service' as provided in Rule 2(l) of Cenvat Credit Rules. He further submitted that the appellants are eligible for cenvat credit of service tax paid on transportation up to the customer's premises for the period w.e.f. 01/04/2008. He further referred to the definition of 'input service' as well as 'place of removal' as defined in Clause (c) of sub-section (3) of Section 4 of Central Excise Act and submitted that mere reading of definition makes it clear that where the goods are not sold at factory gate but from some other place after their clearance from the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....lar issued by the Board is binding on the Department and the Department cannot take stand contrary to the said Circular. For this he relied upon the following decisions: a. UOI Vs. Coastal Container Transporters Association - 2019 (22) G.S.T.L 481 (SC) b. SRD Nutrients Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CCE - 2017 (355) E.L.T. 481 (SC) c. UOI Vs. Arviva Industries (I) Ltd. - 2007 (209) E.L.T 5 (SC) d. CCE Vs. Dhiren Chemical Industries - 2002 (139) E.L.T. 3 (SC) 5. On the other hand, the learned AR defended the impugned order. Learned AR mainly relied upon the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Ultratech reported in 2018 (9) G.S.T.L 337 (SC) wherein the Apex Court has held that after the amendment in the definition ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the various judgments relied upon by both the parties cited supra, I find that after the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Ultratech, the CBEC has issued the Circular dated 08/06/2018 wherein the field formation have been given the liberty to examine each and every case on the basis of the law laid down in various cases. I also find that after the Circular issued by the Board various Benches of the Tribunal have remanded the case back to the original authority to examine the eligibility of cenvat credit of service tax on transportation of goods up to the customer's premises after the period w.e.f. 01/04/2008. By following the ratio of the said decisions, I am of the considered view that in view of the decision of the Madras High Cou....