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 →

Commissioner of Central Excise, 143 Versus M/s Tata Motors Ltd.

2015 (6) TMI 76 - JHARKHAND HIGH COURT

Denial of MODVAT Credit - Non compliance with Rule 57G of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 - Held that:- There is no breach of the Central Excise Act nor there is any breach of Central Excise Rules, 1944. Modvat credit claimed by the respondent upon certain inputs. It is not in dispute that those inputs have been brought into the factory of the respondent. It is also not in dispute that these inputs have also been utilised for manufacturing process. If these two facts have established, looking to .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

evelled by the Excise Department in their show-cause notice. Twice the benefits have been claimed, one by the importer (refund of the countervailing duty) and another by the manufacturer-respondent (Modvat credit upon the inputs). It is the case of the appellant that if one benefit is availed another is not allowed. In the facts of the present case only the manufacturer who is the respondent has claimed the Modvat credit. Even department of Central Excise is not knowing whether importer has clai .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

he Appellant : Mr. Ratnesh Kumar, Adv. For The Respondent : Mr. Sumeet Gadodia, Adv. Per D.N. Patel, J : 1. This Tax Appeal has been preferred against the judgment and order passed by the Custom, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Kolkata, East Zonal Bench, Kolkata (hereinafter referred as CESTAT ). By the order dated 19th October, 2011 appeal preferred by the respondent has been allowed and, therefore, respondent has preferred the present appeal. 2. Learned counsel for the appellant has .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

In the eventualities only the respondent can get Modvat credit. In the facts of the present case, the importer of the goods has not given any declaration along with bill of entry that he will not claim the refund of countervailing duty and, therefore, the respondent has wrongly availed Modvat credit. This is the main argument canvassed by the counsel for the appellant. It is also submitted by the counsel for the appellant that this aspect of the matter has not been properly appreciated by the CE .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ertain inputs. It is not in dispute that those inputs have been brought into the factory of the respondent. It is also not in dispute that these inputs have also been utilised for manufacturing process. If these two facts have established, looking to the order in original, then it appears that there is substantial compliance of the Rules, 1944. II. It is also not the case of the appellant that the original importer has also availed the refund of countervailing duty upon the goods imported. There .....

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