Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
Bdh Industries Ltd vs Commissioner Of Central Excise on 21 May, 2014
IN THE CUSTOMS, EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, WEST ZONAL BENCH AT MUMBAI
COURT NO. II
APPLICATION NO. E/S/94560 to 94568/14
IN APPEAL NO. E/86255 to 86257/14 Mum
(Arising out of Order-in-Appeal No. PD/06, 07 & 08/MV/2014 dated 31.01.2014 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Mumbai)
For approval and signature:
Honble Shri Ashok Jindal, Member (Judicial)
1. Whether Press Reporters may be allowed to see : No
the Order for publication as per Rule 27 of the
CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982?
2. Whether it should be released under Rule 27 of the :
CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982 for publication
in any authoritative report or not?
3. Whether Their Lordships wish to see the fair copy : Yes
of the Order?
4. Whether Order is to be circulated to the Departmental : Yes
authorities?
BDH Industries Ltd.
:
Appellant
Versus
Commissioner of Central Excise,
Mumbai V
Respondent
Appearance Shri Mehul Jivani, C.A. For appellants Shri D.D. Joshi, Supdt (A.R.) For Respondents CORAM:
Shri Ashok Jindal, Member (Judicial) Date of Hearing : 21.05.2014 Date of Decision : 21.05.2014 ORDER NO.
Per Ashok Jindal The appellant is in appeals along with applications for stay against the demands confirmed by way of impugned order.
2. The appellant being an exporter availed the services of CHA and shipping agency for clearance of their goods for export. Availment of CENVAT Credit pertaining to Service tax paid on such services has been denied to the appellant on the premises that these services have been availed by the appellant beyond the place of removal of the goods. Aggrieved by the said order, the appellant is before me.
3. As the issue involved is in a narrow compass therefore, the appeals as well as stay applications are taken up together for final disposal with the consent of both sides.
4. Heard both sides and considered the submissions.
5. In the case of Oriental Containers Ltd. 2012 (28) STR 397 (Tri. Mumbai) this Tribunal has held that in case of export of goods, whatever service have been availed upto that point became input service on which exporter could take credit of service tax paid. In this case, it is not disputed that these services have been availed by the appellant in the course of export of their goods. Therefore, as it is not in dispute that the appellant has not availed these services upto the port of exportation therefore I held that the appellants are entitled for input service credit of the service tax paid on the services of CHA and shipping agency services. In these circumstances, the stay petitions as well as the appeals are allowed after setting aside the impugned order. (Dictated in Court) (Ashok Jindal) Member (Judicial) nsk ??
??
??
??
2