Subscription   Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Articles Highlights TMI Notes SMS News Newsletters Calendar Imp. Links Database Experts Contact us More....
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

M/s Ram Lubhaya & Sons A Unit of Raslon India Ltd. Versus CCE, Ludhiana

2016 (10) TMI 234 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH

Denial of CENVAT credit - input service - commission paid to consignment agents - whether the denial of cenvat credit on commission paid to consignment agents, on the ground that the said service is not eligible as input service and consignment agent .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

able goods are to be sold after their clearance from the factory". - The premises of the consignment agents are covered in place of removal. The appellant correctly taken cenvat credit on commission paid to consignment agents as same has been in .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

l) Sh. Naveen Bindal, Advocate- for the appellant Shri G.M. Sharma, AR- for the respondent ORDER The appellant is in appeal against denying the cenvat credit on commission paid to consignment agents on the premises that the said service is not eligib .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

gent received by the appellant is beyond the factory gate, therefore, commission paid to consignment agents is not eligible for the cenvat credit to them. Moreover, the Ld. Commissioner (A) relied on the decision in the case of Cadila Health care Ltd .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

. The Ld. Counsel for the appellant is submits that as per Section 4(c)(iii) of the Central Excise Act, 1944, the premises of the consignment agents are covered as place of removal of goods, therefore, cenvat credit cannot be denied on these premises .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

persons. Therefore, the case of Cadial Healthcare Ltd. (Supra) is not applicable to the facts of this case. 4. Heard the parties and considered the submissions as per Section 4(c)(iii) of the Central Excise Act, 1944, which is reproduced here as unde .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

what is new what is new
  ↓     bird's eye view     ↓  


|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version