TMI Blog2021 (9) TMI 1383X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... XCISE SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SOUTH ZONAL BENCH CHENNAI [ 2019 (8) TMI 759 - MADRAS HIGH COURT] . The Hon ble Division Bench took note of the fact that the Tribunal had followed the decision in the case of COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE SERVICE TAX, BANGALORE VERSUS M/S ABB LTD. AND OTHERS [ 2011 (3) TMI 248 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT] and held in favour of the assessee. In the instant case also, the Tribunal had followed the decision of the High Court of Karnataka in ABB Limited and held in favour of the assessee. This matter also needs to be remanded to the Tribunal to take a fresh decision and to decide as to the applicability of the two decisions of the Hon ble Supreme Court in COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, BELGAUM VERS ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... luded in the definition of “input service”, especially in respect of the respondent? 2. Whether in view of the varying interpretation of the term -input service- in various decisions, the CESTAT, Chennai was right interpreting the term in the manner as in the order? ” 3. Heard Mrs.R.Hemalatha, learned Senior Standing Counsel, appearing for the appellant/Revenue. 4. We need not labour much to take a decision in these appeals, as identical issue came up for consideration before the Hon ble Division Bench of this Court in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise and Service Tax, Coimbatore v. Pricol Limited, Coimbatore and another [C.M.A.No.1265 of 2012, dated 22.07.2019]. The Hon ble Division Bench took note of the f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... followed the decisions of the Karnataka High Court in the case of CCE ST, LTU, Bangalore Vs. ABB Limited reported in 2011 [23] STR 97 [Kar.] and held in favour of the assessee that the transportation charges incurred by the manufacturer for clearance of final product from the place of removal upto 01.04.2008, when the law was amended in this regard, were included in the definition of --input service--. 3. The learned counsel for the appellant/Revenue has submitted that after the Tribunal decided these appeals, the Hon ble Supreme Court of India, has dealt with this issue in two of the judgments cited at the Bar, viz., [1]CCE Vs. Vasavadatta Cements Limited reported in 2018 [11] GSTL 3 [SC] decided on 17.01.2018 ; and [2] CCE Vs. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... buja Cement Ltd [2017 [6] STR 249 [Tribunal]] and M/s. Ultratech Cement Ltd [2007 [6] STR 364 [Tribunal]]. Those judgments, obviously, dealt with unamended Rule 2[l] of Rules 2004. The three conditions which were mentioned explaining the -place of removal- are defined in Section 4 of the Act. It is not the case of the Department that the three conditions laid down in the said Circular are not satisfied. If we accept the contention of the Department, it would nullify the effect of the word --from-- the place of removal appearing in the aforesaid definition. Once it is accepted that place of removal is the factory premises of the assessee, outward transportation -from the said place- would clearly amount to input service. That place can be wa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
