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

2015 (4) TMI 1021 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

2015 (4) TMI 1021 - CESTAT NEW DELHI - TMI - Waiver of pre deposit - CENVAT Credit - Capital goods - whether the appellant would be eligible for cenvat credit in respect of MS angles, channels, bars etc., which had been taken by them during the period from September 2010 to February 2012 - Held that:- There is no evidence that the fabrication of the capital goods had been declared by them in the ER-1 returns or by any other specific information in this regard given by the appellant. The steel it .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ement of pre-deposit. After considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case and also the plea of financial hardship pleaded by the appellant, we direct the appellant to deposit an amount of ₹ 40 lakh within a period of 8 weeks. On deposit of this amount within the stipulated time period, the requirement of pre-deposit of balance amount of cenvat credit demand, interest and penalty would stand waived and recovery thereof is stayed - Partial stay granted. - Excise Stay No. E/5252 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Duty. The period of dispute in this case is from September 2010 to February 2012. During this period the appellant took cenvat credit of ₹ 2,76,52,972/- in respect of MS angles, channels, TMT Bars etc. The department being of the view that these items are not eligible for cenvat credit either as inputs or as capital goods issued a SCN for recovery of Cenvat credit along with interest and imposition of penalty on them under Rule 15(2) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. 1.2 The SC was adjudicated .....

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 the Commissioner, this appeal has been filed along with stay application. 2. Heard both the sides. 3. Sh. KK Anand, the Ld. Advocate the Ld. counsel for the appellant, pleaded that the steel items, in question, had been used for fabrication of various items of capital goods, for use within the factory, that the items of capital goods fabricated are air pollution control equipment, Air and water cooling/circulation/Distributor plant, material handling/ transferring and feeding equipment, kiln .....

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, the appellant had earlier given a self-certified certificate and subsequently on the instructions of the range superintendent had also furnished a certificate given by a Chartered Engineer, that the Commissioner has not considered the appellants plea with regard to use of the goods and hence, the impugned order is not correct. Sh. Anand, therefore, pleaded for waiver from the requirement of pre-deposit of the cenvat credit demand, interest and penalty for hearing of their appeal and stay on .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ding use of the goods, the drawing and designs of the various items of the Capital goods claimed to have been fabricated have not been enclosed, that in any case, the chartered engineer is a civil engineer who was not competent to certify the user of the goods, that in any case, the certificate has been produced after 2 years, and hence the same lacks credibility, that the fabrication of capital goods was not declared in the ER-1 returns and no specific intimation was given to the Department in .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

le to establish a Prima facie case in their favour. He also cited the judgment of Hon ble Allahabad High Court in the case of Upper Ganges Sugar & Industries Ltd vs CCE Meerut-II reported in 2014 (1) ECS (27) (HC-All) and also the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Madras cements Ltd. vs CCE reported in 2010 (254) ELT 3 (SC). 5. We have considered the submissions from both the sides and perused the records. The only point of dispute in this case is as to whether the appellant would be .....

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