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 →

M/s Krishnav Engineering Ltd. Versus Customs, Excise And Service Tax Appellate Tribunal And Another

2015 (12) TMI 234 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT

Recredit of CENVAT Credit previously reversed - Disallowance of credit on LDO/furnace oil - SCN issued for recredit without proper authoriation - Held that:- appellant had claimed Cenvat credit and had filed the proper invoice bills. The authority was satisfied and credit was allowed for which there is no dispute. However, for whatever reasons, the appellant reversed these Cenvat credit entries and debited the said amount in its books but subsequently, realised that they were eligible for Cenvat .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

so had filed the necessary documents. The letter indicated the details of the description of the goods, the invoice bills and the credit to be taken. This was in consonance with the provisions of Rule 9. If the authority had any objection they should have immediately asked the appellant for further clarifications, which in the instant case was not done. - Consequently, the reversal of entry made by the appellant was justified in the given facts and circumstances of the case. - Decided in favour .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

04 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules of 2004). Departmental audit was carried out by an audit party in which a credit of ₹ 2,92,401/- was disallowed on LDO/furnace oil. Interest of duty amounting to ₹ 43,806/- was also added. The said amount was debited from RG23A. Subsequently, the appellant noticed that under the Rules of 2004 Cenvat credit can be claimed on furnace oil and, accordingly, intimated the Assistant Commissioner, Customs and Central Excise, Ghaziabad vide letter dat .....

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 bill was also filed. No orders were passed and, accordingly, the assessee made a reversal of the entries to the tune of ₹ 3,02,969/- and indicated reversal on their registers, namely, RG23A. Subsequently, a show cause notice dated 27th October, 2005 was issued alleging that credit of ₹ 2,63,446/- in their Cenvat account had again been taken without any refund order or permission from the proper authority and without proper documents as required under Rule 9 of the Rules of 2004 and .....

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 said amount along with interest and penalty. The assessee filed an appeal, which was dismissed and, thereafter, filed a second appeal before the Tribunal, which was partly allowed. The imposition of penalty was quashed but the demand of Cenvat credit and interest was upheld. The Tribunal held that the appellant could not recredit the amount suo moto in the Cenvat account and that appropriate orders was required to be passed by the proper authority. The Tribunal was also of the view that the a .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

nded, read with Rule 15 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 relating to confiscation and penalty and the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal was not legally justified in upholding the applicability of the same? 2. Whether, in view of the fact that the admissibility of Cenvat Credit of ₹ 2,63,466/- on account of use of furnace oil as input in manufacture of Brake Shoe Casting having not been disputed by the lower authorities, the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribuna .....

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 ground that the appellant had taken the Cenvat credit without any refund order or without permission from the proper authority and without filing proper documents under Rule 9 of the Rules of 2004. Rule 9 of the Rules of 2004 prescribes that Cenvat credit could be taken by the manufacturer on the basis of certain documents to be filed, namely, an invoice issued by the manufacturer for clearance of inputs or capital goods, etc. Admittedly, we find that the appellant had claimed Cenvat credit .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

of its Cenvat credit entries and also enclosing the original invoice bills. In this view of the fact, we find that the show cause notice was wrongly issued on a wrong premise that no permission was taken or that original documents were not filed. In fact, we find that the appellant had not only intimated the department about its intention but also had filed the necessary documents. The letter indicated the details of the description of the goods, the invoice bills and the credit to be taken. 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

 

 

 

 

 

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