Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India. Com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Case Laws Manuals Short Notes Articles SMS News Highlights
        Home        
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

C.C.E. & S.T. Delhi-III Versus M/s. Polyblends India Pvt. Ltd.

2015 (11) TMI 507 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

Denial of CENVAT Credit - Respondent availed Cenvat Credit on duty on the strength of these invoices issued by M/s. JOPL. Later on M/s. JOPL failed to comply with certain formalities as per CBEC manual and supplementary instructions 2005. The registration certificate was revoked on 21.09.2010. As the registration certificate was revoked therefore it was held against the respondent that they have not complied with the conditions of Rule 9(5) of the Cenvat Credit Rules 2004 as they have not verifi .....

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 9(5) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. In these circumstances, I hold that respondent has taken the Cenvat Credit correctly on the invoices issued by M/s. JOPL during the intervening period. - No infirmity with the impugned order. Same is upheld - Decided against Revenue. - Appeal No. E/60324/2013-EX(SM) - FINAL ORDER NO. 52081/2015-EX(SM) - Dated:- 26-6-2015 - Shri Ashok Jindal, Member (Judicial) For the Petitioner : Ms. Ranjana Jha, DR For the Respondent : Shri B.L. Yadav, Consultant ORDER P .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ds to the respondent and issued Cenvitable invoices. Respondent availed Cenvat Credit on duty on the strength of these invoices issued by M/s. JOPL. Later on M/s. JOPL failed to comply with certain formalities as per CBEC manual and supplementary instructions 2005. The registration certificate was revoked on 21.09.2010. As the registration certificate was revoked therefore it was held against the respondent that they have not complied with the conditions of Rule 9(5) of the Cenvat Credit Rules 2 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

that at the time of supply of goods M/s. JOPL was registered dealer. Therefore, respondent is entitled to take Cenvat Credit. Against the said order Revenue is before me. 3. The Ld. AR submits that the respondent has not complied with the provisions of the Rules 9(5) of Cenvat Credit Rules 2004 while availing the Cenvat Credit has not verified the antecedents of M/s. JOPL. Therefore, they are not entitled to take Cenvat Credit. The observation made by the Ld. Commissioner (A) will nullify the p .....

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 the registration has been declared invalid ab initio. It is not a simplicitor case of not having registration but of having applied for it and not met the conditions and therefore, it was declared invalid subsequently ab initio. 4. On the other hand, Ld. Consultant of the respondent submits that it is a fact on record of supplying goods by M/s. JOPL. They were registered with the department and having registration certificate and registration was also allowed to them dated 12.08.2010. Ther .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Discussion Forum
what is new what is new
 


Share:            

|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version