Commissioner, Central Gst And Central Excise, Vadodara – II Versus Gujarat Guardian Limited
Central Excise
2018 (2) TMI 1111 – GUJARAT HIGH COURT – 2018 (12) G. S. T. L. 300 (Guj.)
GUJARAT HIGH COURT – HC
Dated:- 15-2-2018
Tax Appeal No. 2 of 2018
Central Excise
MR. AKIL KURESHI AND MR. B. N. KARIA, JJ.
For The Appellant : Mr Sudhir M Mehta, Advocate
ORAL ORDER
(PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI)
1. Revenue is in appeal against the judgement of the Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal dated 12.05.2017 raising following questions for our consideration:
“1. Whether Hon'ble CESTAT is right in holding that the services by a manufacturer for outward transportation of final products from the place of removal should be treated as an input service in terms of Rule 2(I)(ii) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004?
2. Whether Respondent is eligible to take CENVAT Credit of the Service Tax on the value of such services?
3. Whether in the facts a
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
wide in its expression and includes large number of services used by the manufacturer. Such service may have been used either directly or even indirectly. To qualify for input service, such service should have been used for the manufacture of the final products or in relation to manufacture of final produce or even in clearance of the final product from the place of removal. The expression 'in relation to manufacture' is wider than 'for the purpose of manufacture'. The words 'and clearance of the final products from the place of removal' are also significant. Means part of the definition has not limited the services only upto the place of removal, but covers services used by the manufacturer for the clearance of the final products even from the place of removal. It can thus be seen that main body of the definition of term 'input service' is wide and expansive and covers variety of services utilized by the manufacture. By no stretch of imagination can it be stated that outward t
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
so not the intention of the Legislature in the present case.
20. There, of course, are certain areas which still remain to be cleared. It was vehemently contended before us by the counsel for the Revenue that later portion of the definition which provides for the inclusion clause limits the outward transportation service up to the place of removal. That being so, according to them, the outward transport service utilized by the manufacturer beyond the place of removal would not qualify as an input service within the definition of rule 2(l). We may only notice two things in this regard. Firstly, in our view, when we find that outward transport service is covered by the main body of the definition which provides for means part, as specifically including any service directly or indirectly in or in relation to manufacture of final product or clearance of final product from the place of removal, no interpretation of the later part of the definition would permit us to exclude such a servic
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =