9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (9) TMI 1214X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er of sugar who availed Cenvat Credit of duty paid on inputs and capital goods of Service Tax paid on input services. During the period 2006-2007 to 2010-2011, the appellant availed Cenvat Credit of service tax paid on transit insurance in respect of insurance of goods during transit from the factory to the customers premises. The Revenue is of the view that as place of removal is factory gate, therefore, appellant is not entitled to take Cenvat credit of insurance premium. Therefore, impugned proceedings were initiated against the appellant and Cenvat Credit on insurance premium was denied. Consequently, demand of duty was confirmed along with interest and equivalent amount of penalty was imposed. Learned Commissioner (Appeals) reduced the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d Counsel and submits that as the transit insurance premium is not a part of assessable value, therefore, appellant is not entitled to take Cenvat credit as held by Hon'ble Chhattisgarh High Court in the case of Lafarge India Ltd. reported in [2014 (307) ELT 7 (Chhattisgarh)] . He also relied on decision of Apex Court in the case of M/s. Roofit Industries Ltd. reported in [2015-TIOL-87-SC-CX]. He took the shelter of decision of Kohinoor Biscuit Products reported in [2015 (37) STR 567 (Tri-Del)] which has been confirmed by Allahabad High Court as reported in [2015 (38) STR J 124 (All)] . 5. I have considered the submissions of both the sides. 6. It is not in dispute that as per sale contract sugar was required to be delivered at the cu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that case the issue was of goods transportation service, issue of entitlement of input service credit on goods transportation service. Further in the case of Kohinoor Biscuit Products (supra) this Tribunal has given a clear cut finding that if manufacturer clears the goods to depots of some other persons, those persons cannot be treated as place of removal for the manufacture unless sales are on FOR destination basis. Admittedly, in the case in hand sales are on FOR destination basis. Infact decision of this case support the case of the appellant. Further, I find that a similar issue came up before the Tribunal in the case ofSuzuki Motorcycle (I) Pvt. Ltd. reported in [2015 (38) STR 209 (Tri-Del)] wherein this Tribunal has observed t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
