2012 (6) TMI 300

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... mmissioner (Appeals), Revenue has filed the present appeal. 2. We have heard Shri R.K. Gupta, ld. SDR for Revenue and Shri P.M. Panwar, ld. Advocate for the respondent. 3. The issue involved is admissibility of input credit of service tax paid on the outward transportation of the goods from the factory gate to the place of removal. Commissioner (Appeals) have granted relief to the respondent by .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... has paid duty as has been claimed by the appellant. As the sales is on F.O.R. basis, it is obvious that up to the destination ownership of the goods also remains with the appellant and any losses en-route up to the destination will be the responsibility of the consignor and not of the consignee. Thus the facts of the case clearly satisfy the parameters mentioned in Board's aforesaid clarification .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... d the Larger Bench decision of the Tribunal in the case of ABB Ltd. v. CCE&ST [2009] 21 STT 77 (Bang. - CESTAT) (LB) laying down that the credit of service tax paid on transportation up to place of sale is admissible. There is no dispute in the present appeal as regards the factual position that the sale is on FOR destination basis. As such by following the ratio of the above decision of the Hon'b .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X