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

2015 (11) TMI 357 - CESTAT MUMBAI

2015 (11) TMI 357 - CESTAT MUMBAI - TMI - Reversal of cenvat credit on goods lost / written off - returned goods - Held that:- demand in respect of the loss booked under the balance sheet has to be sustained for the reason that if explicitly assessee booked loss is nothing but value which was written off. Therefore on written off value, Cenvat credit is not admissible. Therefore demand of ₹ 1,21,701/- in respect of loss credit is not admissible.

CENVAT Credit - returned goods - .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Decided partly in favour of assessee. - Appeal No. E/515/11-MUM - Dated:- 26-6-2015 - Mr. Ramesh Nair, Member (Judicial) For the Petitioner : Shri Manoj Kasle, Advocate For the Respondent : Shri N. N. Prabhudesai, Asst. Commissioner (A.R.) ORDER Per : Ramesh Nair This appeal is directed against Order-in-Appeal No. PKS/475/BEL/2010 dtd. 20/12/2010 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Mumbai Zone-II, wherein Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the order-in-original dated 28/8/2007 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Sr. NO. Invoice No. & Date Cenvat Credit Entry No. & Date Amount of credit availed (Rs.) 1. 22/10.09.2003 16/68 dtd 03.07.04 93,600/- 2. 08/05.06.2004 18/68 dtd 06.07.04 38,400/- 3. 11/06.07.2004 26/69 dtd 04.08.04 3,360/- 4. 30/04.12.2003 30/69 dtd 10.08.04 2,434/- 5. 14/20.07.2004 39/70 dtd 29.09.04 6,960/- Total 1,44,754/- Duty of the above four items against above rejected goods covered under invoices mentioned at Sr. No. 1 and 2 were declared as obsolete in the balance sheet of 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

with documentary evidence. Since, the rejected and returned goods were not cleared on payment of duty subsequently, the Cenvat credit availed on the said goods totally amounting to ₹ 1,44,754/- was not correct and the same needs to be reversed. On pointing out by the Audit the appellant paid part of the duty amounting to ₹ 31,200/- and interest amounting to ₹ 7436/-. During the audit it was also noticed that in the balance sheet for the year 2003-04 and 2004-05 of the appellan .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

iated against demand. Interest under Section 11AB was also proposed and amount of ₹ 7,436/- paid by the appellant on account of interest was proposed to be appropriated. Penalty under Section 11AC was also proposed. Show cause notice was adjudicated vide order in original dated 21/8/2007 wherein the adjudicating authority confirmed the proposal made in the show cause notice. Aggrieved by the aforesaid order, the appellant preferred an appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals), who upheld th .....

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 dismantle the machines and some of the parts were used in manufacture of the final product and some of the parts got defected and on account of that defective part loss was booked in the balance sheet for the year 2004-05. He submits that there is no dispute for duty paid goods returned to the factory and it was not cleared from the factory. The material was used for further production in their routine production and whatever quantity got wasted that has been cleared as scrap on pay .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

its that in the entire show cause notice, it was alleged that credit is not admissible for the reason that the appellant has booked amount as shown obsolete in their balance sheet which is apparently wrong for the reason that the appellant booked in their balance sheet under head of loss merely due to design fault. Therefore, no goods was become obsolete. He also submits that there is no evidence adduced by the department after taking credit of returned goods; the same have been cleared from 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

as well as the Commissioner (Appeals) has made serious error that in one hand demand of ₹ 1,44,754/- was confirmed on the invoices of the returned goods and at the same time Cenvat credit in respect of said loss of ₹ 4,35,630/- and ₹ 3,32,000/- booked in year 2003-04 and 2004-05 was demanded. Thus lower authority has demanded duty of the same material twice i.e. on direct invoices and other loss booked in the balance sheet, therefore, there is clear duplication of demand. 4. O .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

for the reason that show cause notice itself first denied credit of ₹ 1,44,754/- on the returned goods and subsequently credit of ₹ 1,21,701/- was denied as amount shown in the balance sheet as loss. Show cause notice itself contended that this loss against returned goods which were received under the five invoices on which already demand was confirmed. I am of the view that demand in respect of the loss booked under the balance sheet has to be sustained for the reason that if explic .....

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