Subscription   Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Articles Highlights TMI Notes SMS News Newsletters Calendar Imp. Links Database Experts Contact us More....
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

Neem Engineering Pvt. Ltd. (Formerly Mero Structures (India) Pvt. Ltd.) Versus Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal And Others

2015 (3) TMI 665 - MADRAS HIGH COURT

Waiver of pre-deposit - valuation - credit on inputs supplied to the job worker for fabrication of excisable goods on which job worker on which job worker did not avail credit - Held that:- The first issue on the availment of cenvat credit twice, is an arguable issue and the second issue on the difference between the billed amount and the actual amount received on the basis of the ST-3 returns over which an explanation has been given, however, not accepted by the Department, is a matter for reco .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

s of ST-3 returns, we find that there are some prima facie case in favour of the Department. Therefore, pre-deposit requires to be ordered.

The order of the Tribunal dated 07.01.2015 is modified to the effect that the appellant shall make a pre-deposit of ₹ 10,00,000/- (Rupees Ten Lakhs only) towards pre-deposit on or before 31.03.2015 - Decided partly in favor of assessee. - C.M.A.No.432 of 2015, & M.P.No.1 of 2015 - Dated:- 6-3-2015 - R. Sudhakar And R. Karuppiah,JJ. For the A .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

material period service tax was payable on the amount billed or the amount received by a service provider from the recipient of service? 2. Whether the appellant was entitled to avail credit on inputs supplied to the job worker for fabrication of excisable goods on which job worker did not avail credit as both the consignee and the buyer was the appellant in the invoice raised by the supplier of such material? 3. Whether the Honourable Tribunal was justified in directing the appellant to pre-dep .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

d in the business of executing structural glazing, spider glazing and wall cladding works on high rise and commercial buildings. Alleging that the assessee has availed cenvat credit wrongly to the tune of ₹ 29,22,491/-; irregular cenvat credit taken by the assessee on inputs to the tune of ₹ 14,33,583/-; claim of cenvat credit without valid documents to the tune of ₹ 23,782 and for short payment of service tax to the tune of ₹ 30,10,986/- a show cause notice was issued de .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

tated above and did not correctly avail the Service Tax credit where they are found ineligible. Further the facts relating to receipt of differential value and incorrect availment of cenvat credit would have gone unnoticed but for the efforts of the department to bring it to light, thus warranting invocation of proviso to Section 73(1) and Rule 14 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 for demand of Service Tax not paid and cenvat credit wrongly availed. It further requires recovery of interest under .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

khs. 2.4 Aggrieved by the said order of the Tribunal, the assessee is before this Court raising the questions of law referred supra. 3. Heard learned counsel appearing for the assessee and the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Department and perused the materials placed before this Court. 4. It is seen that there are two major components in the order, which the assessee is aggrieved. He pleads that pre-deposit may be modified stating that the assessee is entitled to the cenvat credit al .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

o an extent of ₹ 30,10,986/-. The plea of the assessee is that it should be based on the actual amount received. The Department proceeded on the basis of the ST-3 returns filed by the assessee. 5. The first issue on the availment of cenvat credit twice, is an arguable issue and the second issue on the difference between the billed amount and the actual amount received on the basis of the ST-3 returns over which an explanation has been given, however, not accepted by the Department, is a ma .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

what is new what is new
  ↓     bird's eye view     ↓  


|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version