The dispute in the present appeal is with regard to the interpretation of “place of removal” of goods for the purpose of input service under the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004.

2. The appellant-assessee deals in the manufacture and sale of cement. According to the appellant, in the present case, sale of cement was made at the destination of the buyer and hence the appellant would be entitled to CENVAT credit on input service on transportation of the cement sold by the appellant-assessee. Initially, the period in dispute was from August-2006 to October-2007 and from November-2007 to July- 2008. In view of the change in definition of input service provided in Rule2( l ) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 w.e.f. 1.4.2008 although the assessing authority as well as the first appellate authority had denied the benefit to the appellant for the entire period but the Tribunal granted the benefit of CENVAT credit to the appellant-assessee for the period upto 31.03.2008 but has denied the same from 01.04.2008 to 31.07.2008, which is the relevant period in question in this appeal.

3. We have heard Sri M.N. Shankare Gowda, learned counsel for the appellant as well as Sri. C.Shashikantha, learne