Home Case Index All Cases Service Tax Service Tax + AT Service Tax - 2018 (8) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (8) TMI 1453 - CESTAT HYDERABADCENVAT credit on the tippers, during the period April, 2006 to September, 2006 - Held that:- The appellant had not declared that they had availed CENVAT credit on tippers, Komatsu PC, Drill Machine, Portable Compressor, etc. - the appellant had been informing the authorities about the availment of CENVAT credit on these kinds of goods and motor vehicles in their monthly returns regularly - the demand is hit by limitation as there is no suppression, mis-statement of facts with an intention to evade duty, while declaring that they availed the CENVAT credit of Central Excise Duty paid on tippers, compressors and other machineries of motor vehicles - demand hit by limitation. CENVAT Credit on tippers, compressors, etc - Held that:- Tribunal in the case of Ganta Ramanaiah Naidu [2009 (9) TMI 261 - CESTAT, BANGALORE] has specifically held that CENVAT credit on such motor vehicles is excluded from the benefit of CENVAT credit as capital goods - the view expressed by the Bench in the case of Ganta Ramaiah Naidu in identical set of facts for denial of CENVAT credit is a correct view - credit allowed. Demand of CENVAT credit on capital goods for the entire amount as being 100% of the duty paid - Held that:- The appellant had not availed the entire CENVAT credit of ₹ 1,96,33,250/- during the period in question. Hence, demanding and confirming the entire amount seems to be incorrect and since this particular plea of the appellant, that they are eligible for 50% of CENVAT credit and balance 50% subsequently is not dealt with by the adjudicating authority in the impugned order, the matter requires re-examination - appeal allowed by way of remand. Demand of Interest - Held that:- The interest liability arises on the amount confirmed and upheld i.e., to the tune of ₹ 3,28,80,899/- and reject the prayers of appellant on interest issue. Penalty - Held that:- Since the entire issue involved in this case is regarding the interpretation of eligibility to avail CENVAT credit on the tippers which are used for rendering output services, the appellant herein could be under bona fide belief that they are eligible to avail the CENVAT credit - penalties imposed on the appellant are unwarranted and is set aside. Appeal allowed by way of remand.
|