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 →

Kernex Microsystems (India) Ltd Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Customs and Service Tax Hyderabad-II

2015 (12) TMI 1106 - CESTAT BANGALORE

Denial of CENVAT credit for the input services viz. advertisement, DVD film production, campaigning in electronic and print media etc. which were used for collecting capital through IPO by the appellant - IPO to collect capital for expansion of manufacturing facilities of their products - Held that:- Impugned order, when it has denied the CENVAT credit available to the appellant, has not talked about the new unit or the old unit. The learned advocate for the appellant however says that they woul .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

nied by the impugned order. When the appellant has been found to be entitled to the CENVAT credit, there cannot be any question of imposition of penalty. Consequently, the impugned order is set aside - Decided in favour of assessee. - ST/1193/2011-SM - Final Order No. 22121 / 2015 - Dated:- 4-11-2015 - Shri Ashok K. Arya, Technical Member For the Petitioner : Shri B.V. Kumar, Advocate ORDER Per : ASHOK K. ARYA Both the parties have been heard in detail. 2. The issue is denial of CENVAT credit fo .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

k, Shamshabad in State of Andhra Pradesh. 3. Appellant has, inter alia, argued that they are entitled to CENVAT credit for the input services as the definition of Rule 2(l) of CENVAT Credit Rules 2004 is very clear; it defines input service(s) by including all kinds of services which are used directly or indirectly in relation to setting up, modernization, renovation or repairs of a factory. 3.1. The learned advocate for the appellant also cites the decision of Honble Bombay High Court in the c .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

CE & ST, Hyderabad-II argues that the appellant could be entitled to the CENVAT credit only in favour of new unit, which was to be set up for expansion of manufacturing facilities. 5. All the facts of the case and the submissions of both the sides have been carefully considered. It is observed that as the definition of Rule 2(l) of CENVAT Credit Rules 2004 is very wide and clear that all the input services which are used directly or indirectly, in or in relation to the manufacture of the fin .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

rectly or indirectly in relation to the manufacture would be admissible for CENVAT credit. The definition as given in Rule 2(l) of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 is quoted below:- Rule 2(l) input service means any service, - (i) used by a provider of [output service] for providing an output service; or (ii) used by a manufacturer, whether directly or indirectly, in or in relation to the manufacture of final products and clearance of final products upto the place of removal, and includes services used .....

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