Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2014 (8) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2014 (8) TMI 573 - AT - Central ExciseCENVAT credit - input services - goods transport agency service - Held that:- Subsequent to amendment of ‘input service' under Rule 2(1) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 by Notification No. 10/2008-CE (NT) dated 1.3.2008, substituting the word "from" in the said phrase to "upto" makes it clear that transportation charges were included in the phrase "clearance from the place of removal" upto the date of the said substitution and it cannot be included in the place of activities relating to the business". It has been held that such interpretation is available till 1.4.2008. There is no material available that the applicant delivered the goods at the customers' premises and therefore the decision relied upon by the learned counsel in the case of Hydro S&S Industries Ltd. (2014 (3) TMI 479 - CESTAT CHENNAI) is not applicable in the present case. Regarding the submission of the learned counsel that the demand is partly barred by limitation, the authorities below have observed that the applicant has not declared in their invoice about the place of removal. Hence the ground of limitation would be looked into detail at the time of hearing the appeals at length - Following decision of CCE, Bangalore Vs. ABB Ltd. [2011 (3) TMI 248 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT] - Partial stay granted.
|