TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (1) TMI 1319
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ue involved herein is whether the Cenvat Credit of Service Tax paid on Goods Transport Agency (GTA) service for outward transportation during the period April, 2017 to June, 2017 is admissible as 'input service' under Rule 2(l) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004? 3. The facts leading to the filing of the instant appeal are stated in brief as follows. The appellant is engaged in the manufacture of excisable goods i.e. SS Welded Tubes and Pipes and also holding registration for payment of service tax on services, namely, GTA and various other services. They are availing cenvat credit of duty paid on inputs/capital goods under the provisions of Cenvat Credit Rules,2004. During the course of Internal Audit (EA 2000), it was noticed that the appellan....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....bid defines 'input service'. prior to 1.4.2008, clause (ii) of Rule 2(l) assigns meaning of 'input service' as any services used by the manufacturer of final product in or in relation to the manufacture of final products and clearance of final products 'from the place of removal'. With effect from 1.4.2008, the word 'from' was substituted by the word 'upto' in Rule 2 (l)(ii) as the words 'clearance of final products from the place of removal' was substituted with the words 'clearance of final products upto the place of removal'. After amendment w.e.f.1.4.2008 Rule 2(i) (ii) ibid provides that 'input service' means any service used by the manufacturer, whether directly or indirectly, in or in relation to the manufacture of final products and....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ch case, the customer's premises is to be treated as the 'place of removal'. 6. 'Place of removal' was not defined under Cenvat Credit Rules initially and w.e.f. 11.7.2014, the term 'place of removal' has been added under Rule 2 (qa) ibid which inter alia includes "------a depot, premises of a consignment agent or any other place or premises from where the excisable goods are sold after their clearance from the factory." 7. While rejecting the claim of the appellant, the authorities below have also referred the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of Commissioner of Central Excise & S.T. vs. Ultratech Cement;2018 (9) GSTL 337 (SC) and the circular dated 08.06.2018 issued by the CBEC as well. I have gone through the afo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ance of the said circular is that the past cases to be decided by the authorities on the facts of each case after taking into consideration various judgements of Hon'ble Supreme Court referred to in that circular. 9. On similar issue, Hon'ble Karnatka High Court in the matter of Bharat Fritz Werner Ltd. vs. CCT, Bangalore; 2022 (66) GSTL 434 (Kar.) after considering the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of Ultratech Cement (supra) and also the circular dated 8.6.2018, has held that from the facts of the case, it is clear that the title of the goods has passed on from seller to the buyer only on the place of destination, which is the address of the buyer. In the said decision, 'place of removal' has been held to be buyer's pre....