Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

2. Briefly stated the facts of the case relating to the Assessees Appeals are that the Appellants were engaged in the manufacture of Biscuits falling Chapter No.19.05 of Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 on job work basis out of the raw material and packing material supplied by M/s Parle Products Pvt. Ltd (herein after called as M/s PPPL) as per the Agreement between the Appellant- assessee and M/s PPPL. The Assessee had availed CENVAT Credit on inputs, capital goods and Input services i.e inward and outward freight (GTA Service) on transport of goods by road and utilized the said credit towards payment of Central Excise duty on the manufactured biscuits on behalf of M/s Parle Products Pvt. Ltd. Show cause cum demand notices were issued from time to time for recovery of CENVAT Credit availed on the said input service. The demands were confirmed and penalty imposed by the Adjudicating Authority. On appeals carried out from the said orders before the learned Commissioner (Appeals), the same were rejected by the learned Commissioner (Appeals). Hence, the present Appeals by the assessee.

4. The learned Advocate Ms.Apana Hirangadi submitted that under an agreement between the Assessee and M/s PPPL in the year 2001, the Assessee had been manufacturing the Biscuits with brand name Parle from the raw materials and packaging materials supplied by M/s PPPL. It is stipulated in the said agreement that the Assessee would be required to deliver the manufactured biscuits at various depots of M/s Parle Products Pvt. Ltd located all over the country and also they were required to pay Excise duty on the price declared by M/s PPPL. In compliance with the conditions of Notification No.36/2001 CE(NT) dt. 26.06.2001 an authorization and joint declaration dt.15.09.2001 enclosing therewith the copy job work agreement was addressed to the Superintendent, Central Excise, Range-I, Division-I, Ahmedabad. She has submitted that the learned Commissioner (Appeals) erred in observing that since the Assessee had manufactured the goods on job work basis and cleared the goods at the factory gate only since the depots were belonging to M/s PPPL Pvt. Ltd, hence the CENVAT Credit on Service Tax paid on freight charges up to such depots is not admissible. The learned Advocate further submitted that the issue is squarely covered by the decision of this Tribunal in identical facts and circumstances in the case of M.P. Biscuits Pvt. Ltd Vs CCE Allahabad  2012 (282) ELT 563 (Tri-Del) and CCE Indore Vs Dhananjay Confectionary (P) Ltd  2010 (20) STR 696 (Tri-Del). She has also submitted that the period involved in the present Appeals was from August 2005 to February 2007 i.e. prior to the amendment to the definition of input service prescribed under Rule 2(l) of CENVAT Credit Rules 2004 w.e.f 01.04.2008, hence the Service Tax paid on outward freight from the place of removal i.e. from the factory gate to the depots of M/s Parle Products Pvt. Ltd would be eligible to CENVAT Credit in view of the decision of Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CCE Vs Parth Poly Wooven Pvt. Ltd.  2012 (25) STR 4 (Guj). Further, responding to the Revenues appeals, the learned Advocate has submitted that after analyzing the evidences on record and the principles laid down in the Larger Bench decision in ABBs case(supra) , the learned Commissioner (Appeals) had allowed the CENVAT Credit of Service Tax paid on inward freight as well as outward freight during the relevant period. Revenue has come in appeal on the grounds that there has been no arrangement/agreement between the Assessee and M/s PPPL to discharge the Service Tax on the said GTA service and the Larger Bench judgment in ABB Ltd.s case has not been accepted by the Revenue. She submitted that specific agreement between the Assessee and M/s PPPL has been made in this regard which has been communicated to the Range Superintendent on 15.09.2001, and the applicable excise duty on the finished goods and service tax on GTA service has been paid, therefore, Revenues appeals are devoid of merit.

5. Per Contra, the learned Authorized Representative for the Revenue has submitted that the biscuits manufactured by the Assessee on job work basis had been subjected to assessment under Section 4A of Central Excise Act, 1944 and the factory gate has been the place of removal in view of the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Kohinoor Biscuit Products Vs CCE Noida  2015 (37) STR 567 (Tri-Del). It is his contention that therefore, the Service Tax paid on outward freight from the factory gate to the depots of M/s Parle Products Pvt. Ltd is not eligible as CENVAT Credit to the assesse-appellant.

7. I have carefully considered the submissions advanced by both sides and perused the records. The dispute which needs to be addressed is: whether the Assessee, a job worker of M/s PPPL, is eligible to CENVAT Credit, on Service Tax paid on out ward freight charges (GTA services), for transporting the manufactured biscuits from their factory to the depots of M/s PPPL. The undisputed facts are that by an agreement entered into between the Assessee and M/s PPPL, the excisable goods viz. Biscuits was manufactured on job work basis and the Assessee had been authorized by the principal manufacturer i.e. M/s Parle Products Pvt. Ltd to carry out all procedural formalities including payment of Excise duty through their authorization letter dt.15.09.2001 duly communicated to the Range Superintendent in consonance with Notification No.36/2001 CE(NT) dt.26.06.2001. Also, it is not in dispute that the period in all these appeals was prior to 01.4.2008. This Tribunal in similar facts circumstances in M.P. Biscuits Pvt. Ltd.s case(supra), after analyzing the relevant agreement, observed as follows:-