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 →

M/s. Paramount Communication Ltd. Versus C.C.E. & S.T. Jaipur-I

2015 (10) TMI 1235 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

Denial of Exemption claim - Non maintenance of separate account - Rule 6(2) of Cenvat Credit Rules 2004 - Held that:- During the intervening period they were having sufficient balance in their Cenvat Credit account to meet the liability of duty confi .....

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 set aside. The contention of the appellant that they have not paid the amount of 10% of the value of exempted final product and taken Cenvat Credit twice wrongly under bonafide belief is not acceptable as appellant are manufacturing excisable good .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

s been reduced by the Ld. Commissioner to the extent of 25% of the duty as they have paid the entire amount of duty before issuance of show cause notice. - Decided partly in favour of assessee. - Appeal No. E/51729/2014-EX(SM) - Final Order No. 52023 .....

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 and imposition of penalty. 2. The facts of the case are that appellant is a manufacturer of dutiable as well as exempted final product and are not maintaining separate account for input / input services which are being used in manufacturing of duti .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ule 6(2) of Cenvat Credit Rules 2004 as they are required to pay 10% of the value of exempted goods to the Department which they failed to do so. In these circumstances, proceedings were initiated against the appellant by way of issuance of show caus .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

appellant paid the amount of 10% of the value of exempted final product and reverse inadmissible Cenvat Credit. After adjudication the adjudicating authority appropriated the amount of duty already paid by the appellant and also confirmed the demand .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

efore me praying that interest is not payable as per the decision of Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka in the case of Bill Forge Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CCE Banglore-2012 (279) ELT 209 (Kar). He also prayed that penalty under section 11AC is not imposable on .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ring the intervening period they were having sufficient balance in their Cenvat Credit account to meet the liability of duty confirmed by way of adjudication order. If it is so then interest is not payable by the appellant as held by the Hon'ble .....

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