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 →

Samrudhi Sugars Ltd Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Aurangabad

2015 (6) TMI 264 - CESTAT MUMBAI

Penalty u/s 11AC - availment of cenvat credit on various capital goods during the establishment of the new unit - whether penalty can be imposed under the facts and circumstances of the case - Held that:- Appellant was setting up a new unit and in that context, they have availed the cenvat credit on many items and even though initially the demand was issued for an amount of ₹ 60,27,939/-, finally the Commissioner has confirmed only an amount of ₹ 13,34,445/-. It is also seen that the .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

e missing in the case and, therefore, penalty imposed is set aside - Decided in favour of assessee. - Appeal No. E/87796/14-Mum - Dated:- 11-3-2015 - P K Jain, Member (T),J. For the Appellant : Shri H S Shirsat, Consultant For the Respondent : Shri Ashutosh Nath, Assistant Commissioner (AR) ORDER Per: P K Jain: Brief facts of the case are that the appellants had availed cenvat credit on various capital goods during the establishment of the new unit and a show cause notice was issued to them prop .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

er, during the course of the personal hearing, they did not press for dropping the amount confirmed. It is also seen that in the appeal filed before this Tribunal, the appellant has initially disputed the denial of cenvat credit of ₹ 8,13,887/- and imposition of equal penalty. 3. The case was heard, wherein the learned counsel was asked by the Tribunal that when they have not pressed for the said demand before the original authority, why are they pressing for the same at this stage and the .....

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 order that they have not suppressed anything from the department and there was no wilful intention to evade the duty and under the circumstances, in view of the Hon'ble Supreme Court decision in the case of CCE vs. Gujarat Narmada Fertilizers Co. Ltd. reported in 2009 (240) ELT 661 (SC) and in the case of CCE, Mumbai vs. Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd. reported in 2004 (171) ELT 159 (SC), no penalty should be imposed as the issue whether the appellants are entitled to cenvat credit for the it .....

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