TMI Blog2017 (11) TMI 884X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... -2017 - Shri S.S Garg, Judicial Member Shri Parashivamurthy, Dy. Commissioner(AR) - For the Appellant Shri Syed Peeran, Advocate - For the Respondent ORDER Per: S.S GARG The present appeal has been filed by the Revenue against the impugned order dt. 31/10/2011 whereby the Commissioner(Appeals) has set aside the Order-in-Original rejecting the refund on transportation of goods. 2. Briefly the facts of the present case are that the respondent had filed refund application dt. 14/05/2010 for refund of service tax of ₹ 16,20,263/- paid on the input services like the courier service transportation of goods, control tower charges used in SEZ operations at their manufacturing unit at Chennai SEZ during the mo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion to the authorised operation and in the instant case the transportation of goods is in relation to the authorised operation on the following grounds:- i. Trading of goods is included in the authorised operation. ii. The goods are sold to the customers on CIF basis (cost, insurance and freight) in which case the place of removal is the customers premises and analogy can be drawn from Rule 2(l) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 wherein credit in terms of Rule 2(l) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 is eligible up to place of removal. iii. Transportation of goods by air and road is specifically included in additional list of services required for authorised operations under Sl.No.32 and 33 of the list. 5.2. He further submit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... )] iii. Reliance Ports Terminals Ltd. Vs. Commissioner [2015(40) STR 200 (Tri.)] iv. CST Vs. Zydus Technologies Ltd. [2014(35) STR 515 (Guj.)] v. Intas Pharma Ltd. Vs. CST, Ahmedabad [2013(32) STR 543] vi. Zydus Tech Ltd. Vs. CST, Ahmedabad [2013(30) STR 616] 5.4. He further submitted that the refund was allowed in respect of transportation service in the respondent s own case as decided by this Hon ble Tribunal vide Final order No.21157-21163/2015 dt. 12/05/2015. 6. After considering the submissions of both the parties and perusal of material on record and the various judgments relied upon by the respondent in support of their case, wherein it has been consistently held that the assessee is entitled fo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
