Subscription   Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Articles Highlights TMI Notes SMS News Newsletters Calendar Imp. Links Database Experts Contact us More....
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai-II Versus Hindustan Composites Ltd.

2016 (3) TMI 198 - CESTAT MUMBAI

Cenvat Credit - Non maintaining of separate accounts - extended period of limitation invoked - inputs used in the manufacture of finished goods cleared on payment of duty and for inputs used in the manufacture of exempted finished goods as required under Rule 6(2) of the Cenvat Credit Rules - Held that:- Assessee has attached various correspondence along with their written submissions which show that the respondent has been maintaining separate records with respect to the input which is used for .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

gisters and documents that they have been separately maintaining records with regard to most of the inputs. Further, the demand pertains to the period May 2004 to September 2005 and the show cause notice was issued on 1.7.2008 i.e. after a period of four years, wherein the respondent in a number of letters exchanged between them and the department, clearly stated regarding the availment of exemption and maintenance of accounts and furnishing of the required return. - As there is no fraud or .....

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 department against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals), dated 24.5.2010 whereby the learned Commissioner (Appeals) has set aside the order-in-original dated 31.3.2009. 2. Briefly the facts of the case are that the respondent is engaged in the manufacture and clearance of excisable goods falling under Chapter 68 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. During the course of audit of the records of the assessee during January-February 2006 and January 2007 for the period from May 2004 to Sept .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

No.10/97-CE dated 1.3.1997 and Notification No.6/2002-CE dated 1.3.2002 during the said period. Thereafter a show cause notice dated 11.7.2008 was issued to the respondent for demand of duty and interest amounting to ₹ 7,88,366/- and also proposed a penalty under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act. The respondent filed reply before the Joint Commissioner and denied the allegations contained in the show cause notice by giving specific instances to show that the respondent has maintaine .....

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 department has filed the present appeal. 3. The learned AR submitted that the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) is not proper and legal and is therefore liable to be set aside on the ground that while passing the impugned order, the Commissioner (Appeals) has ignored the provisions of Rule 6(3)(b) in force at the relevant time, according to which the assessee has no option except to pay duty @ 10% of the amount of the value of exempted goods, where common inputs have been used for dutiable .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

eals) has wrongly relied upon the judgment of the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Chandrapur Magnet Wires (P) Ltd. vs. CCE, Nagpur reported in 1996 (81) ELT 3 (SC). He further submitted that in the present case, the judgment of the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Chandrapur Magnet Wires (P) Ltd. (supra) is not applicable as the facts in the present case are different. He also submitted that the judgment of the Hon ble Supreme Court in Chandrapur Magnet Wires (P) Ltd. has recently been .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

n the manufacture of exempted goods and also discussed the maintenance of separate accounts. The Commissioner (Appeals) has also specifically held that the assessee has submitted details of invoices under which the required quantity of resin was procured by them for manufacture of the exempted goods. The details of the said invoices and the quantity procured were mentioned in RG-23A Part II account and the monthly cenvat returns submitted to the range office as evident from the photocopies of ac .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

me by any cogent evidence. He also submitted that the respondent reversed the cenvat credit attributable to exempted goods before the issue of show cause notice and therefore it tantamounts to as if no credit has been taken and in support of this he cited the following case laws:- (i) Pepsico India Holdings Ltd. reported in 2008 (228) ELT 452 (T); (ii) Pepsico India Holdings Pvt. Ltd. reported in 2015-TIOL-1744-HC-MAD. The learned counsel also submitted that the ratio of the Hon ble Bombay High .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

pect, the relevant portion of the Commissioner (Appeals) s order is reproduced below:- The main contention of the appellant in this regard is that in respect of eight consignments of finished exempted goods sold under eight invoices mentioned in the show cause notice, they had not availed any cenvat credit on the inputs used for their manufacture. These goods were known as Compestos and were exempted under Notification No.10/97. The impugned order has confirmed a demand of ₹ 6,60,366/- 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

nvoices and the quantity procured were mentioned in RG23A Part-I account and the monthly cenvat returns submitted to the Range office as evident from the photocopies of the acknowledged return copies annexed in the appeal. In respect of credit taken on inputs used for manufacture of goods fully exempted under Notification No.64/95-CE dated 16.3.1995, the appellants had taken cenvat credit and subsequently reversed it before clearance of exempted final products. 6.1 Further I find that the learne .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

what is new what is new
  ↓     bird's eye view     ↓  


|| 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