TMI Blog2022 (10) TMI 733X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... or outward transportation of the goods cleared on FOR destination basis. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - ST/50655/2020 - Final Order No. A/50234/2022-SM [BR] - Dated:- 10-2-2022 - Shri Anil Choudhary, Member (J) Shri Vijai Kumar, Advocate, for the Appellant. Ms. Tamanna Alam, Authorised Representative, for the Respondent ORDER Heard the parties. 2. The issue involved in these appeals is whether the appellant, M/s. Mittal Pigments Pvt. Ltd. is entitled to Cenvat credit of service tax paid for availing the Goods Transport Agency Service, for despatching their finished goods (outward transportation) on FOR destination basis to their buyers. Admittedly, the transportation charges have been incurre ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... appellant was called upon to show cause (notice dated 31-7-2018) as to why Cenvat credit wrongly availed and utilized by them on outward transportation of the goods should not be recovered from them under Rule 14 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 read with Section 11AA of the Central Excise Act, 1944 along with interest and penalty under Rule 15(1) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 read with Section 11AC(1) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 has also been proposed. The Adjudicating Authority vide order-in-original has disallowed the Cenvat credit amounting to Rs. 8,35,666/- along with interest, and also imposed penalty of Rs. 83,567/- under Rule 15(1) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 read with Section 11AC(1)(a) of the Central Excise Act, 1944. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ause notice and the impugned order that it is an admitted fact that it is the appellant-manufacturer, who has paid the GTA charges for the services and have taken Cenvat credit of the tax amount charged in the invoice for transportation, issued by the transporter, on the reverse charge basis. 6. Ld. Counsel further points out that as per the show cause notice and according to the Revenue also, the appellant has cleared their goods on FOR destination basis. However, according to Revenue, place of removal is the factory gate and not the premises and/or address of the buyer. 7. The Ld. Counsel further contends that as the appellant has paid the excise duty on the basic sale price, which includes the element of transportation up to the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
