GST Helpdesk   Subscription   Demo   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2015 (8) TMI 246 - MADRAS HIGH COURT

2015 (8) TMI 246 - MADRAS HIGH COURT - TMI - Denial of CENVAT Credit - Capital goods - M.S.Plates, M.S.Angles, M.S.Channels and H.R. Plates, which were purchased and utilized in the construction/erection of plant. - Held that:- Revenue relied upon decision of Saraswati Sugar Mills V. Comissioner of Central Excise, Delhi - III. There is no change in the circumstance and this Court had already considered the issue and held that the decision reported in (Saraswati Sugar Mills V. Commissioner of Cen .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

is Court in [2013 (1) TMI 5 - Madras High Court] , we are inclined to allow the appeal, thereby set aside theorder of the Tribunal - Decided in favour of assessee. - Civil Misc Appeal Nos. 3270 to 3272 of 2010 - Dated:- 3-7-2015 - R. Sudhakar And K. B. K. Vasuki, JJ. For the Appellant : Mr Muthuvenkataraman & M/s Mohammed Shaffiq For the Respondent : Mr A P Srinivas, Standing Counsel-R2 ORDER The above Civil Miscellaneous Appeals have been filed under Section 35-G of the Central Excise Act, .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ly from the aforesaid date?" 3. The appellant/assessee is a manufacturer of sugar, molasses, rectified spirit etc. The assessee availed Cenvat Credit on capital goods used in the erection of various capital goods, viz., M.S.Plates, M.S.Angles, M.S.Channels and H.R. Plates, which were purchased and utilized in the construction/erection of plant. 4. Show cause notices were issued by the Department stating that these are not capital goods and a demand was made on these goods. Reply was sent by .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

andana Global Ltd. & Others reported in 2010 (253) ELT 440 allowed the appeal filed by the Revenue. 6. Aggrieved by the order of the Tribunal, the assessee has preferred the present appeals. 7. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant/assessee submits that the issue involved in these appeals is covered by a decision of this Court dated 10.7.2014 in C.M.A.No.1265 of 2014, wherein, this Court following the ratio laid down in the decision reported in 2010 (255) E.L.T.481 (Commissioner of Cen .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

005 dated 31.12.2012, wherein, while dismissing the appeal filed by the Revenue the Division Bench of this Court held as follows: "8. Even though learned standing counsel appearing for the Revenue submitted that the judgment in the assessee's own case reported in AIT-2011-358-HC (The Commissioner of Central Excise V. M/s. India Cements Limited) had been appealed against, as of today, there are no details; in any event, the fact herein is that the Revenue does not controvert the facts fo .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

2010 (255) E.L.T.481 (Commissioner of Central Excise Jaipur V. Rajasthan Spinning & Weaving Mills Ltd.) and in particular Paragraph Nos.12 and 13, wherein the Apex Court had applied the user test by following the Jawahar Mills's case, this Court held that steel plates and M.S.Channels used in the fabrication of chimney would fall within the ambit of "capital goods". In the face of this decision in the assessee's own case there being no new circumstance or decision in favour .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

, after referring to the decision reported in 2010 (255) E.L.T.481 (Commissioner of Central Excise Jaipur V. Rajasthan Spinning & Weaving Mills Ltd.), the Apex Court held that in view of the findings rendered by the Tribunal that the machineries were complete and having regard to the meaning of the expression "components/parts", with reference to the particular industry in question, the Apex Court rejected the appeal filed by the assessee. 11. Thus going by the factual finding, whi .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 



|| 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