2008 (3) TMI 111

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Respondent. [Order] -1. Heard both sides. 2. The appellants filed this appeal against impugned order whereby Cenvat Credit in respect of service tax on the outward freight was disallowed. 3. Contention of the appellants is that the Commissioner (Appeals) relied upon the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Gujarat Ambuja Cement, reported in 2007 (6) S.T.R. 249 = 2007 (212) E.L.T. 410 ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 4. Contention of the Revenue is that in the present case place of removal is factory gate. Therefore, service tax paid on freight paid in respect of transportation of goods from factory gate to the customer's place cannot be considered as input service as the same has nothing to do to the manufacture of goods. Therefore, credit was rightly denied. 5. I find that in this case contention 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

....paid removal of the goods. The learned counsel would contend that the assessable value of the goods included the cost of the transport in question also and duty was paid on an assessable value including the disputed freight. His contention is that in such a case, credit is available in terms of the decision of this Tribunal in the case of Gujarat Ambuja [2007 (6) S.T.R. 249 (Tribunal) = 2007 TIOL ....