M/S. SKF SEALING SOLUTIONS PVT. LTD. Vs. COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE (APPEALS) BANGALORE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AFTER a perusal of the records and hearing both sides, I am of the view that the appeal itself requires to be finally disposed of. Accordingly, after dispensing with pre -deposit, I take up the appeal. The impugned demand of duty of Rs.2,88,139/ - arises out of denial of CENVAT credit on GTA service used by the appellant for outward transportation of their final products to customers' premises during the period from November 2004 to November 2007. Before the lower appellate authority, the assessee claimed support, inter alia, from the Tribunal's Larger Bench decision in ABB Ltd. vs. Commissioner: : 2009 (15) STR 23 (Tri. -LB) wherein CENVAT credit on GTA service used in the aforesaid manner by a manufacturer of final product was held to be admissible to them for a period prior to 1.4.2008, the date on which Rule 2(l) of the CENVAT Credit Rules was amended to substitute the word 'upto' for the word 'from' occurring immediately before the phrase 'place of removal'. The learned Commissioner (Appeals) did not accept the assessee's contentions, by observing that the Tribunal's decision had not attained finality inasmuch as it was under challenge before the Karnataka High Court. Today, the learned counsel for the appellant points out that the Hon'ble High Court has upheld the Tribunal's view. The learned Additional Commissioner (AR) has fairly acknowledged this fact. The Hon'ble High Court has held that the transportation of final products from factory to the premises of buyers was also covered by the expression 'from the place of removal' used in the text of the definition of 'input service' under Rule 2 (l) prior to its amendment. As the period of dispute in this case is prior to 1.4.2008, the appellant can legitimately claim the benefit of the High Court's judgment. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and the appeal is allowed. The stay application also stands disposed of.