Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2013 (2) TMI 112

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... t had availed MODVAT Credit on various inputs during the period from January to October, 1997. The Department raised objection on the admissibility of MODVAT Credit on such inputs. Consequently, a show cause-cum-demand notice was issued to them on 09.12.1997, demanding MODVAT Credit of Rs.9,48,965.81 and proposing penalty under erstwhile Rule 173Q of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. The said show cause-cum-demand notice was adjudicated by the Additional Commissioner by disallowing MODVAT Credit of Rs.5,48,896.21 under Rule 57I(1) and imposed penalty of Rs.1.00 lakh under Rule 173Q(bb) of the erstwhile Central Excise Rules, 1944. 2.2. Aggrieved, the Appellant filed an appeal before the learned Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals). The le .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Solvent 1425 . He has submitted that the learned Commissioner (Appeals) has rightly referred to the judgement of CESTAT in the case of TELCO vs. CCE, 2001(136) ELT 305(T) in coming to the conclusion that classification of input cannot be altered in the hands of the input-user. The learned AR has also referred to the judgement of the Hon ble Supreme Court on the said issue in the case of Sarvesh Refractories(P)Ltd. vs. CCE & C, 2007(218) ELT 488(SC), which has been followed by this Bench of the Tribunal in the case of CCE, Jamshedpur vs. Usha Martin Ltd., 2009(248) ELT 776(Tri.-Kol.). 5. Heard both sides and perused the records. I find that from the initial amount of demand of inadmissible Credit of Rs.9,48,965.81, the Adjudicating Authorit .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... tries case (cited supra), is inapplicable to the facts of the present case, in view of the fact that there has been change in the definition of input as was in existence in 1997 and now in the provisions of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2002/2004. In the changed definition of input under the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2002/2004, Motor Spirit commonly known as petrol, was excluded from the scope of input, whereas in the definition of input during the relevant period, the goods classified under Chapter Sub-Heading 2710.11 had been excluded from the scope of input .  Therefore, Solvent 1425 even if considered as not Motor Spirit and allowed CENVAT Credit to be availed on the same under the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2002/2004, the same cannot be made applica .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates