Home Case Index All Cases Service Tax Service Tax + AT Service Tax - 2015 (11) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (11) TMI 617 - AT - Service TaxDenial of 67% abatement claimed by it under Notification No. 15/2004-ST, 19/2005-ST and 1/2006-ST - CENVAT Credit - Held that:- In the case of Hello Minerals Water (2004 (7) TMI 98 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD) it was held in the context of Notification No. 15/94-CE that the reversal of modvat credit amounted to non taking of credit inputs. The said judgment has been followed in the case of Amola Holdings (2009 (6) TMI 71 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD). As regards the judgment of Bombay High Court in the case of Dilip Chhabaria Designs (2015 (4) TMI 387 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT) it is to state that in that case the credit was taken on duty paid on chassis and other inputs which was not utilised since the same lapsed due to the assessee no longer remaining under the Excise net. Thus, that judgment was dealing with rather different set of facts. We find that this issue has been analysed in detail by CESTAT in the case of Punj Lloyd [2015 (10) TMI 2294 - CESTAT NEW DELHI] where also it has been held that the said ratio of the judgment of Allahabad High Court in the case of Hello Minerals (supra) continues to be applicable on the subject and the ratio stands confirmed by Supreme Court in the case of Sonalac Paints and Coatings Ltd. vs. CCE [2015 (4) TMI 697 - SUPREME COURT]. - Impugned order is unsustainable - Decided in favour of assessee.
|