TMI Blog2013 (12) TMI 82X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oods is to spread over many years - Following CCE Salem Vs Rogini Mills Ltd.[2010 (10) TMI 424 - MADRAS HIGH COURT] - A decision to the effect that assessees can bring in capital goods, use it for a few days and then remove it without reversal of any Cenvat credit taken is not consistent with the overall scheme of Cenvat credit and can lead to abuse of the scheme – Decided against Assessee. - E/392/2008 - MISC Order No.42706/2013 - Dated:- 18-11-2013 - G Raghuram , P K Das And Mathew John, JJ. For the Appellant : Shri Ganesha Haavanur, Additional Commissioner (AR) For the Respondent : Shri G. Natarajan, Adv. PER : Mathew John In this proceeding, a reference made by a Single Member Bench of the Tribunal at Bangalore to a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l. Apparently the decision of the Larger Bench had not decided some aspect of the dispute in question and therefore Learned Member has referred the following issues to be decided by this Larger Bench: (i) Whether the decision of Larger Bench in the case of Modernova Plastyles Pvt. Ltd. is silent on the depreciation aspect to be granted on the capital goods removed after use and proportionate reversal of credit and whether the same needs to be addressed to by a further Larger Bench. (ii) Whether the decision of the Division Bench in the case of Geeta Industries Pvt. Ltd. has correctly granted the benefit of depreciation and subsequent proportionate reversal of credit, in the absence of specific provisions. 3. After the Single ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... envat credit of 2.5% for each quarter of a year from the date of taking of Cenvat credit. However, the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Harsh International (Khaini) Pvt. Ltd. (supra) held that there was no provision in the Cenvat Credit Rules during the relevant period for reversal of any amount when used capital goods were removed and therefore no demand was sustainable. Thus, though there is agreement on the issue that the full credit taken at the time of receipt of the goods need not be reversed, the views of different High Courts has differed in the matter of quantum of credit to be reversed. 6. We have heard both sides and examined the legal provisions and the decisions cited above. The dispute is for the period June 2006. Dur ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 11-2007 the provision in force read as under: With effect from 10.09.2004, when new Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 were introduced, the relevant rule, i.e. Rule 3 (5), read as below: When inputs or capital goods, on which CENVAT credit has been taken, are removed as such from the factory, or premises of the provider of output service, the manufacturer of the final products or provider of output service, as the case may be, shall pay an amount equal to the credit availed in respect of such inputs or capital goods and such removal shall be made under the cover of an invoice referred to in rule 9. 8. During the period when similar provision was in force CBEC had issued Circular No. 643/34/2002-CX., dated 1-7-2002 to the effect that credit amo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
