Subscription   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
CGST - Acts + GST Rates GST Ntf. GST Forms GST - Manual GST - FAQ State GST Acts SGST Ntf. I. Tax Manual
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

M/s LG Electronics India Pvt Ltd Versus Commissioner of Central Excise Noida

Short reversal of SAD - On the Department pointing out the mistake in September, 2006, the assessee made good the short payment - clearances of the imported inputs to ancillary units for manufacture of PCBs - Interest u/s 11AB - Penalty u/s 11AC - Held that:- Demand in this case is barred by limitation. Further, as the appellant were having sufficient balance in their Cenvat Credit Account, the demand of interest is also not sustainable. Further, as the show cause notice was also issued by invok .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

: Shri B L Narsimhan, Adv For the Respondent : Shri Pramod Kumar, Joint CDR ORDER Per Ashok Jindal The appellant M/s. L.G. Electronics Pvt. Ltd. are engaged in the manufacture of colour television sets (CTVs). They import various electronic components for the purpose. On import of these inputs, the appellants pay duties of customs including CVD and SAD leviable under Section 3 of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975. These inputs are removed to job workers/ancillary units by reversing CVD and SAD paid 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

provisions of Rule 14 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 (CCR) read with Section 11 A(1) of the Central Excise Act (the Act). An amount of interest was confirmed towards the interest leviable under Section 11 AB of the Act. Equal amount of penalty as the amount of duty demanded was imposed on the appellants under Rule 15(2) of the CCR read with Section 11 AC of the Act. 2. It is submitted that the assessee was using a software for computation of duty liability to be discharged at the time of remov .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ng out the mistake in September, 2006, the assessee made good the short payment. The show cause notice basic to the proceedings was issued on 27.08.2008. The appellants submitted that the credit of SAD relatable to electronic components removed during the material period was never utilized and they always had credit in excess of ₹ 5,44,82,338/- in their CENVAT account during the material period. This showed that the appellants did not have the intention to avail CENVAT credit wrongly. Ther .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ay). Again the same was affirmed by the Bombay Apex Court vide Order dated 17.11.2014 in SLP No.17997/2014. 4. On the other hand, ld. Departmental Representative reiterating the findings of the impugned order. 5. Heard both the sides. 6. Considered the submissions. 7. In appellant's own case at their Pune Unit, this Tribunal has observed as under:- "We have carefully perused the case records and considered the rival submissions. We find that in the instant case, the appellants imported .....

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