TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (5) TMI 503
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ted 30.3.2022 [OIO] with a condition is assailed by M/s. Nirman Infra Steel Pvt. Ltd. [Appellant] in this appeal. 2. The appellant manufactures TMT bars (thermo-mechanically twisted bars), MS scrap (mild steel scrap) and other excisable products and is registered with the central excise department and has been paying duty. During audit, it was found that the appellant had not included the outward freight of the goods in the assessable value of the goods sold on FOR destination basis and thereby short paid duty. A Show Cause Notice dated 25.10.2018 [SCN] was issued to the appellant demanding duty of Rs. 12,33,361/- under section 11A(4) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 [Act] along with interest under section 11AA of the Act. It was further ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....was the buyer's premises. The appellant's case is that it's factory gate was the place of removal. 5. The expression 'place of removal' is used in the same sense in two different places- under section 4 of the Act and in the CENVAT credit Rules, 2004 [CENVAT Rules]. While Section 4 of the Act obligates the assessee to pay duty on value including all costs upto the place of removal, CENVAT Rules entitle the assessee to CENVAT credit of the service tax paid on transportation of goods up to the place of removal. The rationale is self-evident. CENVAT Rules allow the assessee to take credit of duty paid on inputs and service tax paid on input services and use it to pay central excise duty on the final products, the result being the net ef....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....was not part of the proceedings; (ii) The condition imposed by the Commissioner (Appeals) introduces a fresh and independent civil consequence to the appellant which was never contemplated at the stage of the initiation of the proceedings; (iii) The appellate authority cannot enlarge the scope of any proceedings or create a new liability against the assessee; (iv) In view of the legal position, the condition imposed by the Commissioner (Appeals) directing reversal of CENVAT credit on outward GTA service is without authority of law and is ab initio null and void; (v) The SCN only dealt with the valuation of the goods and hence the order must be confined to that decision; (vi) Consequential relief ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....edit on the cost of transportation upto the buyers' premises. Such a stand cannot be accepted. However, learned counsel is correct in her assertion that denial of CENVAT credit was not part of the SCN or the order of the Deputy Commissioner and only valuation was. Therefore, the Commissioner (Appeals) can decide only the question of valuation and for this purpose, he should consider all facts, including the fact that the appellant has, by its submissions before us, implicitly agreed that it has treated the buyer's premises as the place of removal and availed CENVAT credit and then decide the matter. It may not be out of place to mention that in view of the conflicting decisions on the question of what will be the place of removal when goods....