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

2016 (2) TMI 109 - CESTAT KOLKATA

2016 (2) TMI 109 - CESTAT KOLKATA - TMI - Recovery of interest - Inadmissible cenvat credit on basic customs duty instead of CVD - entire amount of cenvat credit was later voluntarily reversed much before issuance of the show cause notice - Held that:- Undisputedly, the appellant had reversed the cenvat credit, before issuance of the demand notice. Also, it is not in dispute that demand notice was issued three years after reversal of the credit. The Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) has dropped the pen .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

y limitation in view of the judgement of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in Hindustan Insecticides Ltd. case (2013 (8) TMI 225 - DELHI HIGH COURT ). - Decided in favour of assessee - Appeal No. E/269/12 - Order No. FO/A/75085/2016 - Dated:- 1-1-2016 - DR. D.M. MISRA, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) For the Petitioner : Sri Harakamal Chakraborty, G.M. (F&A) For the Respondent : Sri S.S.Chatterjee, Supdt.(AR) ORDER PER DR. D.M.MISRA: 1. This is an appeal filed against Order-in-Appeal No. 04/HAL/2012 dt.17.02.2 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

0 for appropriation of the amount already reversed and with proposal for imposition of penalty and recovery of interest. On adjudication, penalty was imposed and interest was directed to be paid. 3. Aggrieved by the said Order the appellant preferred an appeal before Ld. Commissioner (Appeals). The Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) set aside the penalty under Rule 25 of CEA, 1944, however, upheld the recovery of interest u/s 11AB of CEA, 1944. Hence, the present appeal. 4. Sri Harakamal Chakraborty, GM .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

etc. is barred by limitation in view of the judgement of the Hon ble Delhi High Court in the Hindustan Insecticides Ltd. -vs.- Commissioner of Central Excise, LTU 2013(297) E.L.T. 332(Del.). 5. Ld. AR for the department reiterated the findings of the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals). 6. Heard both sides and perused the records. Undisputedly, the appellant had reversed the cenvat credit, before issuance of the demand notice. Also, it is not in dispute that demand notice was issued three years after rev .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

issued for recovery of interest issued after three years, was barred by limitation in view of the judgement of the Hon ble Delhi High Court in Hindustan Insecticides Ltd. case (supra). Their Lordships in the said case observed as: 14. A reading of the aforesaid paragraph would show that in the said case notice of payment for interest was issued after four years and it was held that it was beyond a reasonable period and the department could recover the amount from the Assessing Officer, who had .....

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