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

2015 (10) TMI 1689 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD

2015 (10) TMI 1689 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD - 2016 (335) E.L.T. 775 (Tri. - Ahmd.) - Admissibility of CENVAT Credit - Capital goods - Invocation of extended period of limitation - Held that:- Issue was finally resolved by the Larger Bench in the case of Vandana Global Ltd Vs CCE Raipur (2010 (4) TMI 133 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI (LB)). Under this case law, published in 2010, it was held that the CENVAT Credit on inputs used in the making of support structures for capital goods is not admissible. As the issu .....

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 of dispute is subsequently decided by the Larger Bench of the CESTAT. The very fact that the issue is decided in 2010 by Larger Bench in the case of Vandana Global Ltd Vs CCE Raipur (supra) clearly convey that there was a confusion in the mind of the manufacturers regarding the admissibility of CENVAT Credit on disputed items. - Appellant did not had any intention to evade payment of duty and accordingly, the extended period is not invokable. - Decided in favour of assessee. - Appeal No.E/ .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

he Appellant argued that the issue involved in the present appeal is admissibility of CENVAT Credit on certain items like S.S. Sheets, Plates, Joists, Channels, Coils, M.S. Angles, H.R. Coils, M.S. Plates, Flanges etc, used in the fabrication of storage tank and support structures of the storage tanks. It was his case that majority of the items are used in the fabrication of storage tank from the above mentioned raw materials and became admissible as inputs as per the definition given under Rule .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

at the amendment carried out in Rule 2(k) of CENVAT Credit Rules 2004, effective from 07.07.2009, is not retrospective as held by Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Mundra Port & Special Economic Zone Ltd Vs CCE & C [2015-TIOL-1288-High Court-AHM-ST]. The learned Advocate further argued that the entire demand pertains to the period 2005-2009 and the show cause notice was issued after a period of one year on 03.06.2010 and is clearly time barred because of the law settled only .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

es, H.R. Coils, M.S. Plates, Flanges etc, is not admissible as the same were used in the making of support structures meant for machinery. On the issue of time bar, he relied upon the case law of CESTAT Delhi in the case of Lakhan Singh & Co Vs CCE Jaipur [ST/A/58310-58311/2013-CU(DB), dt.15.10.2013] to argue that the extended period will be applicable in this case as the applicability of extended period has to be seen with respect to the facts of each case. 3. Heard both the sides and perus .....

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 issue was finally resolved by the Larger Bench in the case of Vandana Global Ltd Vs CCE Raipur (supra). Under this case law, published in 2010, it was held that the CENVAT Credit on inputs used in the making of support structures for capital goods is not admissible. As the issue of admissibility of CENVAT Credit on these items in the manufacture in the present proceedings was disputable and different opinions were given by CESTAT and Courts, extended period of limitation for demanding duty .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

on doors, false ceiling, compactor for document keeping, sheets for roofing, flooring for finished goods storage area, tube light fittings, etc. Appellant claimed the credit of these items as capital goods under Rule 2 (a)(A) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. The issue of admissibility of Cenvat Credit on certain items and support structures was the subject matter of litigations between the manufacturers and the department. Conflicting views were being expressed by various courts as claimed 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

 

 

 

 

 



|| 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