TMI Blog2021 (6) TMI 27X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the finished goods - It was held in the case of THE COMMISSIONER, CENRTAL GOODS AND SERVICE TAX VERSUS M/S. ULTRATECH CEMENT LTD. [ 2020 (3) TMI 1206 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT] that Appellants are eligible for the cenvat credit of service tax paid on outward freight. CHA service used for export of goods manufactured by the appellant - HELD THAT:- It has been consistently held that in case of export the place of removal stands shifted to the port of export therefore all the services which are used beyond the factory gate but up to the port of export falls within the term place of removal hence the Cenvat credit on the service used for removal of goods up to the place of removal is admissible. The CHA service is also used from removal o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... arges is integral part of the assessable value of final goods and the duty is discharge on the said value. Therefore, the place of removal is the buyer s place hence the credit is admissible on GTA. As regard CHA service he submits that CHA service is used for export of goods and in case of export the port of export became the place of removal. Hence, all the services used up to the port are admissible for Cenvat credit. He placed reliance on the following judgments: M/S ULTRATECH CEMENT LTD 2019(2) TMI 1487 CESTAT AHMEDABAD M/S ULTRATECH CEMENT LTD 2020 (3) TMI 1206- GUJARAT HIGH COURT SANGHI INDUSTRIES LTD 2019 (369) ELT 1424 (Tri.- Ahmd.) DYNAMIC INDUSTRIES LTD.2014 (307) ELT 15 (Guj.) 3. On the other hand Shri Vino ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that the freight charges were integral part of the assessable value of finished goods. However, I find that the condition stipulated under the Board s Circular dated 23.08.2007 viz. the seller bore the risk of loss or damage to the goods during transit to the destination had not been satisfied in the assessee s case. Since the benefit of Cenvat Credit can only be allowed on event of showing the facts and circumstances as stipulated in the said Circular. I further find that in the present case, the assessee is preparing an invoice in the name of their buyers, thereby indicating a Sales transaction. It is not a situation where the goods are first cleared from the factory and a buyer identified subsequently. If the goods are cleared to a prem ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e delivery of goods up to their customers doorstep. In such case when the sale of the goods is completed at the doorstep of the Customer or depot/ stockiest as the case may be the point of sale shall be such doorstep. We find that the Circular No. 1065/4/2018 CX dated 08.06.2018 issued by the CBEC in this context clarifies as under: 3. General principle : As regards determination of place of removal , in general the principle laid by Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of CCE Vs. Ispat Industries Ltd 2015 (324) ELT 670 (SC) may be applied. Apex Court, in this case of has upheld the principle laid down in M/s Escorts JCB (Supra) to the extent that Place of removal is required to be determined with reference to point of sale with ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 4. Exceptions: (i) The principle referred to in para 3 above would apply to all situations except where the contract for sale is FOR contract in the circumstances identical to the judgment in the case of CCE, Mumbai-III Vs Emco Ltd 2015 (322) ELT 394(SC) and CCE Vs M/s Roofit Industries Ltd 2015(319) ELT 221 (SC). To summarise, in the case of FOR destination sale such as M/s Emco Ltd and M/s Roofit Industries where the ownership, risk in transit, remained with the seller till goods are accepted by buyer on delivery and till such time of delivery, seller alone remained the owner of goods retaining right of disposal, benefit has been extended by the Apex Court on the basis of facts of the cases. 4.3 The aforesaid judgment has ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
