Just a moment...

Report
FeedbackReport
Bars
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Feedback/Report an Error
Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / RSS

2021 (9) TMI 942

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e order dated 13.07.2007 in Appeal No.198 of 2007 on the file of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai. 2. The Appeal was admitted on the following substantial questions of law :- "A) Whether the Tribunal went wrong in denying the benefit of input service credit paid on outward transportation of goods delivered at the doorsteps of the buyers in the light of the Circular No.97/6/2007-ST, dated 23.08.2007? B) Whether the Tribunal went wrong in equating the definition of "input" under section 2(k) and input services under section 2(l) especially when the expressions "clearance of final products from the place the removal" is conspicuous by its absence under the definition of 'input'? C) Whether the Trib....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ation up to the place of removal' as an embargo in providing the benefit of input service under sub clause (ii) of sec. 2(l) overlooking the fact that the claim of input service benefit by the applicants are only in relation to finished goods removed from the factory and not for inputs or capital goods as stipulated in the inclusive part. I) Whether the order of the Tribunal is correct in law for having not considered the ratio laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of Black Diamond Beverages and another Vs. CTO reported in 1998 1 SCC 458 which has laid down the position as how to interpret the inclusive part of the definition by proceeding to hold 'neither any rule of interpretation nor any judicial authority has tabooed it ?....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....me of input services were not even in vogue even to be tested in the said decision? N) Whether the Tribunal went wrong in analyzing the transaction only from the input perspective and not from input service especially when the definition of input under rule 2(k) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 contains exclusive clause seeking to exclude various items such as Light Diesel Oil and High Speed Diesel Oil and motor spirit etc., whereas the definition of input services under Rules 2(l) does not have any such exclusions ? O) Whether the Tribunal went wrong in construing the expressions 'directly or indirectly' or 'in or in relation to clearance of final products from the place of removal' by giving a narrow and restricted mea....