9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (12) TMI 1177X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Resistors and Potentiometers; were availing the CENVAT credit of the duty paid on inputs, capital goods and input services as per the provisions of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004; during an audit it was noticed that appellants had availed irregular CENVAT credit of the service tax paid on parcel services which were utilised for exports beyond the place of removal and service tax paid under "Goods Transport Agency Services". The said CENVAT Credit was availed during the period December 2011 to October 2016; show cause notice dated 04.01.2017 was issued for demand of recovery of an amount of Rs. 11,89,045/- on the ground that CENVAT Credit is ineligible as being towards the goods exported and for the services rendered beyond the place of removal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... which means that the seller bear all the cost and risks involved in bringing the goods to the place of destination and has an obligation to clear the goods not only for export but also for import, to pay any duty for both export and import and to carry out all Customs formalities. It is clear that the ownership of the goods remained with the appellant till delivery of these goods to the buyer relying on the jugdgement of the Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of Ambuja Cements Limited vs. Union of India-2009 (236) ELT 431 (P&H) = 2009-TIOL-110-HC-P&H-ST and CBEC circular No.97/08/2007 dt.23.8.2007 dropped the demand and allowed the credit availed by the respondents. Aggrieved from the said order, the Revenue is before me. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and the respondent has paid service tax on the courier/transportation charges, in that circumstance, the respondent is entitled to avail the credit. She also relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Madras Cements Limited vs. CCE- 2015-TIOL-1682-HC-KAR-CX and submits that the CBEC circular No.999/6/2015-Cx dt.28.2.2015 is not applicable to the facts of this case. 5. Heard both sides and considered the submissions. 6. The Revenue has filed this appeal on the ground that in the case of export of the goods, place of removal is port of export and to that extent, they have relied on para 4 of the circular dated 28.2.2015. which reads as under: 4. In most of the cases, therefore, it would appear that han ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... amined the issue and held that the circular No.97/6/2007-ST dated 23.8.2007 lays down three conditions, namely, (a) the ownership of goods and the property of the goods remained with the seller of the goods till the delivery of goods in acceptable condition to the purchaser at his door step (b) the seller bore the risk of loss or damage to the goods during transit to the destination and (c) the freight charges were integral part of the price of goods. 9. Admittedly, the respondent has compiled with these conditions, in that circumstance, I hold that the Commissioner (Appeals) has rightly allowed the credit on courier and transportation charges to the respondent for transportation of the goods to the foreign buyer premises. It is not dispu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
