TMI Blog2008 (7) TMI 102X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 124/2008 - A/1387-1393/WZB/Ahd/2008-CII - Dated:- 16-7-2008 - Shri B.S.V. Murthy, Member (Technical) (Final Order Nos. A/1387-1393/WZB/Ahd/2008-CII dt. 16.7.2008 certified on 24.7.2008 in Appeal Nos. E/118-124/2008) Dr. M.K. Rajak, SDR for Appellant. Shri P.V. Sheth, for Respondent. [Order per B.S.V. Murthy Member (Technical) - In all these seven appeals filed by the Revenue, the issue is same and therefore all of them are taken together for disposal. The short issue involved in all these appeals is eligibility of service tax paid on CHA services rendered in the port to the exporter when the export has been made on FOB basis or CIF basis. The Commissioner (Appeals) has held that service tax paid on CHA services is admis ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the property or the ownership in the goods has passed to the buyer or not and in the case of FOB/CIF sale, the property passes only after the goods are loaded for the purpose of transportation or when the goods reached the destination as the case may be. At this stage, the ld. SDR submits that in view of the two conflicting decisions cited, the matter may be referred to the Larger Bench. 3. I have considered the submission from both the sides. There is no dispute that the goods have been sold on FOB/CIF basis. There is also no dispute that the service tax had been paid for the CHA services rendered. There are only two questions to be decided. The first is what would be the place of removal in such cases. I find that the clarification is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... a factory gate sale, sale from a non-duty paid warehouse, or from a duty paid depot (from where the excisable goods are sold, after their clearance from the factory), the determination of the 'place of removal' does not pose much problem. However, there may be situations where the manufacturer/consignor may claim that the sale has taken place at the destination point because in terms of the sale contract/agreement (i) the ownership of goods and the property in the goods remained with the seller of the goods till the delivery of the goods in acceptable condition to the purchaser at his door step; (ii) the seller bore the risk of loss of or damage to the goods during transit to the destination; and (iii) the freight charges were an integral p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Circular was issued by the CBEC on 23.8.2007 and therefore ld. Member did not have the benefit of the Board's Circular at that time it is also noticed that in para-4, it has been stated in the order that "ld. SDR submits that input services, should be strictly construed as per the definition The services rendered at port by CHAs are after clearance of the goods from the factory gate and hence cannot be treated as input services". From this it emerges that the place of removal in that case was factory gate. There no doubt that in each and every case, it is necessary to consider as to exactly which is the place of removal before allowing the benefit of CENVAT credit Therefore any decision rendered in an individual case cannot be applied ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
