Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2011 (10) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2011 (10) TMI 364 - CESTAT, AHMEDABADCenvat Credit - Capital goods destroyed - Insurance claim received - Revenue contended incurance claim is cum duty - Held That:- there cannot be a demand for duty in absence of removal/destruction. In this case, as already observed, there is no evidence to show that the capital goods have been destroyed or removed. When the capital goods have not been destroyed/removed and are in the factory and are in use, CENVAT Credit taken cannot be demanded. In this case, it is not because of non-use of capital goods that the CENVAT Credit that is being demanded but due to the fact of insurance claim amount received by the appellant. Treating it as cum duty amount, duty has been demanded. In this case, the demand has been made under Rule 14 of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. The first element that has to be shown for such demand is the fact that the CENVAT Credit has been taken and input/capital goods have not been used in accordance with the rules. - Decided in favour of assessee.
|