Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / TMI Blogs / RSS

2023 (11) TMI 564

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... records of the appellants by the Department it has come to notice that they have availed cenvat credit of service tax of Rs. 11,39,618/- (Rupees eleven lakhs thirty nine thousand six hundred and eighteen only) paid on outward freight i.e. service tax paid under GTA for transportation of the final product beyond the place of removal. In this case the goods are sold at the factory gate. i.e., place of removal. Hence, the outward freight for transportation of goods sold at the factory gate is post manufacturing expenses and beyond the place of removal, hence, it cannot be termed as 'input services' for the purpose of availing cenvat credit. The Commissioner (Appeals) has confirmed the demand, interest and penalty holding that in this case the....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the above contract also it is clear that the freight is not included in the assessable value however, the same was separately charged to the customers. This is a very important aspect to decide the admissibility of the credit. I have also carefully perused the CA Certificate submitted by the Learned Counsel according to which also it is clear that though the freight was included in the total invoice value, however the same was not included in the assessable value of the excisable goods sold by the appellant. Therefore, the ratio of the judgments in the case of M/s. Ultratech Cements Limited and M/s. Sanghi Industries Limited is not directly applicable in the facts of the present case." 3. Heard the learned Authorised Representative (AR).....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....aring i.e., 08.09.2023. However, the liquidator has not attended the hearing nor sent any communication seeking adjournment. 6 . Further, under the CESTAT Procedure Rules, 1982, which reads as under:- "RULE 22. Continuance of proceedings after death or adjudication as an insolvent of a party to the appeal or application. - Where in any proceedings the appellant or applicant or a respondent dies or is adjudicated as an insolvent or in the case of a company, is being wound up, the appeal or application shall abate, unless an application is made for continuance of such proceedings by or against the successor - in - interest, the executor, administrator, receiver, liquidator or other legal representative of the appellant or....