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 →

M/s. New Allenberry Works Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Delhi IV, Faridabad

2015 (6) TMI 1007 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

Denial of cenvat credit - denial of claim on strength of six invoices issued by second stage dealer - demanding duty along with interest and imposing penalty - Held that:- On being asked, the manufacturer supplier invoice was not provided for verification as same is not relied upon documents. When the manufacturer invoices has not been relied to allege against the appellant that they have taken inadmissible cenvat credit on the strength of second stage dealer invoices, the foundation of show cau .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

voices as per the show cause notice. Both the lower authorities have gone beyond the allegation in the show cause notice holding that appellant has received the invoices not the goods. Therefore, finding of both the lower authorities is beyond the scope of show cause notice as the appellant has received the goods in their factory against duty paid invoices, therefore, they have correctly taken the cenvat credit. - Decided in favour of assessee - Excise Appeal No. 673 674 of 2012- (SM) - Final 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

2. In appeal No. 674/2012, the appeal is filed by the appellant for denial of refund on duty paid during the course of investigation, wherein cenvat credit is sought to be denied to the appellant and same has been confirmed as per Appeal No. E/673/2012. As appeal No. E/674/2012 is the consequence of appeal No. E/673/2012. Therefore, appeal No. E/673/2012 is taken up for disposal first and the result of the same shall be followed in Appeal No. E/674/2012. 3. The facts of the case are that the app .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

il form. A case has been made against the appellant on the basis of invoices to allege that the description of the goods is not same in all the manufacture s invoices with the second stage dealer. Therefore, appellant is not entitled to take cenvat credit on these goods. Consequently, the show cause notice was issued and cenvat credit was denied to the appellant along with interest. Consequently, duty was demanded along with interest and equivalent amount of penalty was imposed. During the cours .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

appellant has paid the duty to the second stage dealer on the impugned goods and availed cenvat credit. He also submits that the understanding of the second stage dealer is that the SS flat, wire rods in coil form are only steel rods. Therefore, while issuing invoices to the appellant, they have given the description as steel rods instead of SS flats/ wire rods. It is also submitted that rate of duty on both the items is same. Moreover, except one invoice, i.e. 241 dated 26.11.05, classificatio .....

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