Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India. Com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Case Laws Manuals Short Notes Articles SMS News Highlights
        Home        
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

Vako Seals Pvt Ltd Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai-V

2015 (7) TMI 544 - CESTAT MUMBAI

CENVAT Credit - input service - Renting of immovable property - rental premises was not included in the registered premises - Penalty u/s 11AC - Premises which was not part of their manufacturing premises and had been included in their Central Excise Registration only on 31/3/2009 therefore it is contended in the show cause notice that said premises could not be considered as part of their factory premises to be used in the manufacture of their goods and therefore service cannot be considered as .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ion premises the same is not used for activity related to manufacture.

The whole emphasize for disallowing credit was given by the lower authorities on the ground that since the said rental premises was not included in the registered premises therefore credit is not admissible - use before or after, when it is meant for factory activity, credit is admissible whether the premises was included in the registered premises or otherwise. It is kept in mind that service is not tangible unli .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

redit is admissible, therefore the impugned order is set aside. - Decided in favour of assessee. - Appeal No. E/263/11-MUM - Final Order No. A/1511/2015-WZB/SMB - Dated:- 15-5-2015 - Ramesh Nair, Member (J),J. For the Appellant : Shri J N Tiwari, Adv. For the Respondent : Shri Sanjay Hasija, Superintendent (AR) ORDER Per: Ramesh Nair: This appeal is directed against Order-in-Appeal No. SB(139)139/MV/2010 dtd. 10/12/2010 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) of Central Excise, Mumbai, wherein Ld. .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ot be considered as part of their factory premises to be used in the manufacture of their goods and therefore service cannot be considered as input service. Show cause notice culminated into adjudication order wherein adjudicating authority has confirmed demand of Cenvat Credit on renting service amounting to ₹ 57,407/-, demanded interest under Section 11AB, imposed penalty of ₹ 57407/- under Section 11AC, in addition, penalty of ₹ 2,000/- under Rule 15(4) of Central Excise Rul .....

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 Revenue allowed the Cenvat Credit however Cenvat credit for the prior period i.e. before 31/3/2009 was denied only on the ground that the said premises was not included as the part of the factory premises. He submits that for taking Cenvat credit in respect of the rental premises it is not necessary or it has not been provided in the Cenvat Credit Rules that the said premises should be included in the registered premises of the factory. It is his submission that so long the premises used in re .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Discussion Forum
what is new what is new
 


Share:            

|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members ||

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

Go to Mobile Version