2023 (7) TMI 296

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....oices at page 129-131 of the appeal memorandum which indicate that the assessable value on which Central Excise duty has been paid is inclusive of the freight element. He also produced the Circular F.No. 116/23/2018-Cx dated 08.06.2018 wherein the CBIC has clarified on this issue. 3. Learned Authorized Representative relies on the impugned order. He argued that the appellant has been recovering freight from the buyers and therefore, the benefit of cenvat credit on freight element cannot be allowed. 4. I have considered the rival submissions. It is noticed from the Order-in-Original that essentially credit has been denied on the grounds that the sale contract and the invoices do have the words "Door Delivery" or "FOR" mentioned on the said....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ity on the issue it has been decided that Circular No. 988/12/2014-CX dated 20.10.2014 shall stand rescinded from the date of issue of this circular. Further, clause (c) of para 8.1 and para 8.2 of the circular no. 97/8/2007-CX dated 23.08.2007 are also omitted from the date of issue of this circular. 3. General Principle: As regards determination of 'place of removal, in general the principle laid by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CCE vs Ispat Industries Ltd 2015 (324) ELT 670 (SC) may be applied. Apex Court, in this case has upheld the principle laid down in M/s Escorts JCB (Supra) to the extent that place of removal is required to be determined with reference to 'point of sale' with the condition that place of re....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....i) The principle referred to in para 3 above would apply to all situations except where the contract for sale is FOR contract in the circumstances identical to the judgment in the case of CCE, Mumbai-III vs Emco Ltd 2015 (322) ELT 394 (SC) and CCE vs M/s Roofit Industries Ltd 2015 (319) ELT 221(SC). To summarise, in the case of FOR destination sale such as M/s Emco Ltd and M/s Roofit Industries where the ownership, risk in transit, remained with the seller till goods are accepted by buyer on delivery and till such time of delivery, seller alone remained the owner of goods retaining right of disposal, benefit has been extended by the Apex Court on the basis of facts of the cases. (ii) Clearance for export of goods by a manufacturer shall ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d of limitation in cases where an alternate interpretation was taken by the assessee before the date of the Supreme Court judgment as the issue is in the nature of interpretation of law. 8. Hindi version of the circular will follow. (Mayank Sharma) OSD (CX) From the above circular, it is apparent that the essential criteria for allowing or disallowing the credit is if the Central Excise duty has been paid after including the freight element or otherwise. In case the Central Excise duty has been paid after including the freight element in the assessable value then the cenvat credit of the service tax paid on the freight element has to be allowed. Prima facie from the perusal of the sample documents produced by the appellant, it is notic....