Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2022 (10) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (10) TMI 1004 - AT - Central ExciseCENVAT Credit - inputs - capital goods - short payment of duty due to difference in assessable value in ER-I Return vis-à-vis with the sales register - whether the show cause notice was rightly issued invoking the extended period of limitation? - HELD THAT:- The items – Floor Top Hardener/Paint has been used for repair & maintenance of the floor of the factory for filling in the gaps between the floor tiles. Accordingly, this is an eligible input under Rule 2 (k) of the Cenvat Credit Rules and accordingly, cenvat credit on the same is allowable. CENVAT Credit - capital goods - Induction lamps - Lift table - HELD THAT:- These are essential for use in the factory, without which taxable finished goods cannot be manufactured. Demand of Rs.90,665/- - it is alleged in the show cause notice that during re-conciliation of the assessable value shown in ER-1 Returns vis-à-vis Sales Register, there was some apparent difference, on which duty has been demanded - HELD THAT:- The appellant have explained that this relates to the period May, 2016 and Jan. 2017. In order to arrive at the correct excise duty liability, they receive reports from the SAP Programmes, which were duly verified from the Accounts for discharging the excise duty liability. It is explained that there is some difference in the assessable value as per data submitted to the Audit and as per ER-I Return, as the assessee is working under MRP basis, under which duty was paid on the MRP subject to abatement. The appellant has turnover of approximately Rs.30 plus crores p.m. and hence for such accounting difference, no adverse inference can be called for - no duty can be demanded as there is no case made out of any clandestine removal on the part of the appellant. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
|