Case Law Details
M/s Groz Beckert Asia Pvt Ltd Vs Commissioner of C.E (Cestat Chandigarh)
The appellant is in appeal against the impugned orders, wherein the Cenvat credit availed on courier service has been denied on the ground that the appellant is selling the goods at their factory gate, therefore, for the courier service, they are not entitled to avail the Cenvat credit.
2. The Ld. Counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant is sending the goods through courier and till the goods reach to the buyer’s place, the appellant is the owner of the goods. In case, the buyer refused to take the delivery of the goods, the goods were returned by courier to them. In that circumstance, till the delivery of the goods to the buyer, they are the owner of the goods; therefore, in view of the CBCE Circular No. 1065/4/2018 dt. 08.06.2018, they are entitled to avail the Cenvat credit.
3. On the other hand, the Ld. A.R. submits that the appellants are not entitled to avail the Cenvat credit as they are selling the goods at their factory gate by delivering the goods through courier and charging C.S.T. thereon. Therefore, when they are charging C.S.T., it means that they have sold the goods at the factory gate.
4. Heard the parties and considered the submissions.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
