K.S.JHAVERI,J. - (1.) By way of this appeal, the appellant has challenged the judgment and order of the Tribunal whereby the Tribunal has dismissed the appeal preferred by the department.
(2.) The Learned Counsel for the appellant has framed the following substantial question of law : (i) Whether the impugned services namely Outdoor Catering, Clearing and Forwarding (C&F) and the GTA (Good Transport Agency) (outward transportation from factory to buyer's place/premises) in respect of which the assessee had availed in Cenvat credit of service tax amounting to Rs. 37,28,467/- during the period from January 2006 to September 2006, are eligible 'input services' within the meaning of 'input service' defined under Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 and the assessee was justified in availing the Cenvat credit on the same?"
(3.) While considering the case, the Tribunal in para 2 observed as under : "2. We find that all three disputed issues stand decided in favour of the assessee. As regard the outdoor catering services, the Larger Bench of the Tribunal in the case of CCE v. GTC Ltd. [2008 (12) E.L.T. 468 (Tri.-LB)] has held in favour of the assessee. The said decision was before the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay and was affirmed in the case of CCE Nagpur v. Uttratech Cement Ltd. [2010 (260) E.L.T. 369 (Bom.)]. As regards the clearing and forwarding services, the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CCE, Ahmedabad v. Cadila Healthcare Ltd. [2013 (30) S.T.R. 3 (Guj.)] has held that clearing and forwarding agent services are cenvatable. Similarly, in the case of outward transportation of the goods from the factory of the customer place has been held to be cenvatable by the Larger Bench decision of the Tribunal in the case of ABB Ltd. Confirmed by Hon'ble Karnataka High Court reported as CCE v. ABB Ltd. [2011 (23) S.T.R. 97 (Kar.)].";