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 →

The Commissioner of Central Excise Versus M/s Sundaram Auto Components Ltd.

2015 (10) TMI 720 - MADRAS HIGH COURT

Denial of CENVAT Credit - whether the manufacturer is entitled to claim credit for the duty paid by the job worker or not - Held that:- First respondent/assessee handed over plastic materials during the period from July 2006 to December 2006 to a Company by name Nypro Forbes Products Private Limited for carrying out certain job works. The goods were handed over after availing credit for inputs, but, not actually paying duty. The Company which undertook the job work, while returning the goods, af .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

the time when the goods were supplied, they availed the credit. After the Company which undertook the job work, had paid the duty, even according to the Department, the job worker was not liable to pay it. Since they have paid and collected it from the assessee, what the first respondent collected was only the duty that had to be paid on account of the mistake committed by the job worker. The original authority and the appellate authority wrongly construed the same as a double benefit by applyin .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

t, 1954. 2. Heard Mr.T.Chandrasekaran, learned Senior Panel Counsel for the appellant and Mr.M.Karthik, learned counsel for the first respondent. 3. By a show cause notice dated 6.11.2007, the assessee was called upon to show cause as to why the excess credit allegedly claimed by them as CENVAT credit should not be reversed and interest over penalty levied. It was followed by an order in original dated 29.7.2008, demanding a sum of ₹ 1,91,995/- being the CENVAT credit availed by the assess .....

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 amendment to be carried out by a further order dated 26.4.2011. This order did not alter the finding recorded in the original order. Therefore, aggrieved by the original order of the Tribunal dated 1.12.2010, the Commissioner of Central Excise is on appeal. 5. The only question of law on which the Revenue has come up with the above appeal is as to whether the manufacturer is entitled to claim credit for the duty paid by the job worker or not. 6. The above issue has already been answered by 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

 

 

 

 

 

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