Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2013 (11) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2013 (11) TMI 1530 - CESTAT AHMEDABADDenial of CENVAT Credit - Interest u/s 11AB - Penalty u/s 11AC - Supplementary invoices - Applicability of Rule 9(1)(b) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 - Held that:- Bar for availment of credit on supplementary invoices would operate only when the additional amount of duty becomes recoverable from the manufacturer on account of non-levy or short levy by reason of fraud, collusion or any wilful misstatement or suppression of facts etc. Further, the prohibition to avail credit on supplementary invoices will operate only in the case of sale. - Therefore, when there is simply a stock transfer the prohibition under Rule 7(1)(b) will not be applicable. - The provisions of Rule 7(1)(b) of the earlier Cenvat Credit Rules are identical to the provisions contained in Rule 9(1)(b) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. In view of the above settled position of law differential duty paid under supplementary invoices even for extended period will be admissible to the recipient factories of the appellant because there is no sale of goods between the sister concerns of the appellant. - demands and penalties confirmed/imposed against the appellant, do not survive - Decision in the case Karnataka Soaps and Detergents Ltd. v. CCE, Mysore [2005 (6) TMI 182 - CESTAT, BANGALORE] followed - Decided in favour of assessee.
|