Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
National Plastic Technologies Ltd vs Commissioner Of Gst&Amp;Cce(Chennai ... on 26 November, 2019
CUSTOMS, EXCISE & SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
CHENNAI
REGIONAL BENCH - COURT NO.III
Excise Appeal No.41438 of 2019
(Arising out of Order-in-Appeal No.50/2019 (CTA-II) dt. 29.03.2019 passed by
Commissioner of Central Tax (Appeals-II), Chennai)
M/s.National Autoplast
A-28, SIPCOT Industrial Growth Centre,
Oragadam, Sriperumpudur Taluk Appellant
Kancheepuram 602 105
VERSUS
Commissioner of Central Tax
Chennai Outer Commissionerate,
Newry Towers, 2nd Floor, Plot No.2054, I Block
IInd Avenue, Anna Nagar,
Chennai 600 040 Respondent
WITH Excise Appeal No.41439 of 2019 (Arising out of Order-in-Appeal No.61/2019 (CTA-II) dt. 29.03.2019 passed by Commissioner of Central Tax (Appeals-II), Chennai) M/s.National Plastic Technologies Ltd.
C-12, SIPCOT Industrial Park, Irungattukottai, Sriperumpudur Taluk Kancheepuram 602 105 Appellant VERSUS Commissioner of Central Tax Chennai Outer Commissionerate, Newry Towers, 2nd Floor, Plot No.2054, I Block IInd Avenue, Anna Nagar, Chennai 600 040 Respondent APPEARANCE :
Shri T.R. Ramesh, Advocate For the Appellant Ms. K.Komathi, JC (AR) For the Respondent 2 CORAM : HON'BLE MS. SULEKHA BEEVI, C.S., MEMBER (JUDICIAL) Date of Hearing : 26.11.2019 Date of Decision : 26.11.2019 FINAL ORDER No. 41586-41587 / 2019 The brief facts of the case are that the appellants are engaged in the manufacture of motor vehicle parts and are availing cenvat credit on inputs / input services. On verification of records, it was noticed that appellants have availed credit of service tax on outward freight charges. It was the view of the department that credit availed on service tax paid on freight charges in respect of outward transportation of the goods upto the buyer's premises is not eligible for credit. SCNs were issued for the period September 2015 to February 2017 (Appeal E/41438/2019) and January 2016 to June 2017 (Appeal E/41439/2019) proposing to recover the ineligible credit along with interest and for imposing penalty. After due process of law, the original authority confirmed the demand, interest and imposed penalty. In appeal, Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the same but however reduced the penalty. Hence these appeals.
2. On behalf of the appellants, Ld. Counsel Shri T.R.Ramesh appeared and argued the matter. He submitted that the Board's Circular No. 1065/4/2018-CX. dt. 08.06.2018 has clarified that the decision rendered by the Hon'ble Apex Court in M/s.Roofit Industries Ltd. - 2015 (319) ELT 221 (SC) would be applicable for the valuation of the goods that are delivered at the buyer's premises as also when the assessee has included 3 the freight charges in the assessable value while discharging central excise duty. Thus, place of removal becomes buyer's premises; that therefore the decision in the case of Ultra Tech Cement Ltd. rendered by the Apex Court in 2018 (9) G.S.T.L 337 (SC) is not applicable. The Hon'ble Apex Court was dealing with the issue when the goods are delivered upto to the buyer's premises when the place of removal is the factory gate. Ld. counsel relied upon the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Genau Extrusions Ltd. Vs CGST & CE Salem - 2019-TIOL-2560- CESTAT-MAD and requested that the matter may be remanded to the adjudicating authority so that appellant would be able to establish that the freight charges have been included in the assessable value while discharging excise duty.
3. Ld. A.R Ms. K.Komathi appeared for the department. She supported the findings in the impugned order.
4. Heard both sides.
5. The issue is with regard to the credit availed on finished goods that have been transported and delivered from the factory to the buyer's premises. The said issue has been analyzed by the Tribunal in the case of M/s.Genau Extrusions Ltd. (supra) wherein the Tribunal has taken note of the decision rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of M/s.Roofit Industries as also Board's Circular No.1065/4/2018-CX dt. 08.06.2018 issued by the Board. Appellant has not produced sufficient 4 documents to show that the freight charges have been included in the assessable value. On the request made by the ld. counsel for the appellants, I am inclined to grant appellant a further chance to adduce evidence in this regard. The matter is therefore remanded to the adjudicating authority who shall consider the matter afresh after giving an opportunity of hearing to the appellant. While doing so, the adjudicating authority shall take note of the discussions made by the Tribunal in the case of M/s.Genau Extrusions (supra). It also needs to be mentioned that Commissioner (Appeals) vide OIA No.20 & 21/2018 dated 19.02.2018 and OIA No.22,23 & 24/2018 dated 19.02.2018 has given the relief to the appellants for the earlier period. Impugned orders are set aside. Appeals are allowed by way of remand.
(order dictated and pronounced in court) (Sulekha Beevi C.S) Member (Judicial) gs 5