CESTAT BANGALORE BENCH reiterated the following, while passing the final order no. 1324 to 1328/09 dt 30.10.09 in re: SAINT GOBAIN VETROTEX INDIA LTD and ors. vs. COMMR. OF SERVICE TAX, BBANGALORE and ors.:-

QUOTE: Heard both sides and perused the records. The issue involved in all these appeals are regarding denial of CENVAT credit on Service Tax paid on GOODS TRANSPORT AGENCY. We find that the issue is no more res integra as the issue came up before the Larger Bench of the Tribunal in the case of ABB Ltd. & ors vs. CCE&ST, Bangalore & ors. [2009-92-RLT-665.

Accordingly, we find that the issue is now settled in favour of the assessee.UNQUOTE

[for full text of the judgement please visit http://www.taxesinindia.com  and click on the citation taxind_2009_szb_b_1324_1328]

CESTAT ORDERS

VENKATRAMAN RAGGHUPATHY, Web admin.

CESTAT ORDERS CENVAT CREDIT, Goods Transport Agency, SERVICE TAX

In the High Court of Judicature at Madras, in the decision taken on 23/07/2008, while dismissing the appeal no. C.M.A. 2116 of 2008 in re: COMMR. OF C.EXCISE, PONDICHERRY vs CESTAT, it was observed as follows:

QUOTE : An identical issue has been considered by this Court in C.M.A. No.1808 of 2008 [2008-230-ELT-209 (Mad.)], wherein by judgement dt. 10/7/2008 held that the requirement of the provision is that if the stock of the inputs as such or in process or the inputs or the capital goods is also transferred along with the factory or business premises to the new site or ownership and the inputs, or capital goods, on which credit has been availed of are duly accounted for to the satisfaction of the Deputy Commissioner of Central Excise. Thus, in this case, the input as such or in progress, has not available as the input has already has already been put to use, the same has been verified and the Deputy Commissioner of Central Excise satisfied about the genuineness of the same, in those circumstances of the case, we are of the view that the finding arrived at by the Tribunal is in accordance with the requirement of the statute and the interpretation of the provision by the Department that there must be a transfer of input even if it is not available is extraneous to the statutory provision. Hence the appeal is dismissed. No cost. UNQUOTE

[for full text of the judgement, please visit http://www.taxesinindia.com and click on the citation taxind_2008_hc_mad_cma_2116]

HIGH COURT JUDGEMENT

VENKATRAMAN RAGGHUPATHY, Web admin.

HIGH COURT JUDGEMENTS CENVAT, CENVAT CREDIT, RULE 10, TRANSFER OF INPUTS

The High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam, while deciding the C.E. Appeal Nos. 21 and 23 of 2005, in re: COMMISSIONER OF C.EX. & CUS., COCHIN vs EXCEL CORRUGATED BOZES (P) LTD., observed as follows : -

QUOTE : The duty is claimed from the respondent for the reason that the declaration filed by the awardees were belated. The Tribunal noticed that for belated supply declaration, the respondent cannot be penalized through levy of duty. It is not in dispute that the awardees are liable for payment of duty for the goods cleared to them. We do not find any grievance at all because if duty is charged, they are entitled to get CENVAT credit and when duty is not charged credit is not taken by them. Consequently, the awardees will be paying full duty on the products sold by them. Therefore we find no grievance for the department against the order of the Tribunal. We therefore dismiss the appeals. UNQUOTE

[for full text of the judgement, please visit http://www.taxesinindia.com and click on the citation taxind_2008_hc_ker_cea_21_23]

HIGH COURT JUDGEMENT

VENKATRAMAN RAGGHUPATHY, Web admin.

HIGH COURT JUDGEMENTS CENVAT CREDIT