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

2015 (10) TMI 1236 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD

2015 (10) TMI 1236 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD - TMI - Denial of CENVAT Credit - whether CENVAT credit on the capital goods is admissible to the appellant when depreciation claimed under the Income Tax Act, 1961 initially was subsequently reversed by filing revised income tax returns - Held that:- It is observed from the relied upon case laws that this issue has been settled by series of case laws including order passed by this bench in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Surat-I vs Utsav Silk Mi .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ppeal has been filed by the appellant against O.I.A No. SRP/93/DMN/VALSAD/2012-13 Dated 23.08.2012 under which first appellate authority has upheld O.I.O No. CEX/26/DEM/Adj/GS-Addi./12-13 Dated 15.05.2012. Under this O.I.O Dated 15.05.2012 Adjudicating Authority disallowed credit of ₹ 11,73,596/- alongwith interest on the grounds that appellant cannot avail CENVAT credit as appellant has claimed depreciation of capital goods under Section 32 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. An equal amount of .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

icate to the extent that appellant has debited excess credit of ₹ 11,63,724/- as a result of excess depreciation claimed. He also relied upon the following case laws to argue that once the claim for depreciation made in income tax return is reversed and a certificate to that effect is produced then net result will be that appellant has not claimed depreciation on capital goods and can avail CENVAT credit simultaneously:- (i) Commissioner of Central Excise, Surat-I vs Utsav Silk Mills [2009 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

rns for the period 2006-2007 to 2008-2009 as mentioned in Para 6 of the O.I.A Dated 23.08.2012 passed by the first appellate authority. He strongly defended the order passed by the lower authorities. 4. As a counter to the argument made by the Learned Authorised Representative, it was submitted by Learned Senior Advocate that in the same paragraph, it is subsequently mentioned that revised income tax returns for the financial year 2010-2011 was filed under which depreciation claimed the assessme .....

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