Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2017 (1) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (1) TMI 224 - AT - Central ExciseRefund - Cenvat credit on capital goods - clause -2B of N No. 32/99-CE - Rule- 4 (2) (b) of the CCR 2004 - Held that: - So for as preliminary objection of the Learned AR, regarding filing of two appeal is concerned, it is observed that Com (A) has given only one order No. 38/GHY/CE(A)/GHY/2014 to OIA dt 21/2/14 when two OIA order-in-original number were required to be given when two order-in-originals were being decided. So for as the issue of cash refund of EC & S&H EC is concerned Com (A) in Para-14 of OIA dt 21/2/14 has relied upon the case laws of this bench where the same issue has been decided in favour of the Revenue. In the case of VMI Industries Vs. CCE Jamu [2013 (12) TMI 695 - CESTAT NEW DELHI (LB)] the same issue with respect to area based exemption Notification No. 56/2002-CE dt 14/11/2002 has been decided by CESTAT Delhi by majority in a difference of opinion situation. Regarding taking of balance 50% Cenvat Credit on the capital goods in April 2012 it is observed that Rule 4 (2) (b) of Cenvat Credit Rules 2004 (CCR) does not mandate appellant to take credit compulsorily in the month of April of the next financial year - As the entire exercise is revenue neutral appeal of the appellant to the extent is allowed by setting aside recovery made by the Adjudicating authority on this account - Appeal partly allowed.
|