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 →

The Commissioner C.C. E&ST, Visakhapatnam-I Versus M/s Trimex Sands Pvt. Ltd. Srikakulam District

2016 (6) TMI 607 - CESTAT HYDERABAD

Penalty imposed under Rule 15(2) of Cenvat Credit Rules - suppression of fact or fraud - whether the Commissioner (Appeals) has no power to remand? - Held that:- The Commissioner (Appeals) has not remanded the matter. The Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the recovery of credit availed and used for civil construction and machinery support structures and directed the jurisdictional Divisional Officer to quantify the demand. In fact there is no order of remand for adjudication of an issue passed by th .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

returns and furnishing of informations by the respondent. There is no case for revenue that any hidden information was received by inspection or search. So the conclusion of the Commissioner (Appeals) that the facts of the case do not pose a situated for imposing penalty, does not call for any interference. - E/22965/2014 - A/30303/2016 - Dated:- 31-3-2016 - Ms. Sulekha Beevi, C.S. Member(Judicial) Shri V.K.Shastri, AR for the Appellant Shri Rajaram. R, Chartered Accountant & Shri Satish Sa .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

e respondent alleging irregular availment of credit on MS angles, Plates, Channels, Beams, Joists etc., as inputs. The respondent defended the notice contending that the explanation-2 to Rule 2(k) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 which restricts Cenvat credit on cement, angles, channels, CTD etc. used for construction of factory shed, building or laying of foundation or making structures for support of capital goods was inserted in the said Rules only w.e.f. 07-07-2009 and that it is not applicable .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

d declared the availment of Cenvat credit in their ER-1 returns and Cenvat credit statements failed. That the extended period is not invokable as there is no suppression of facts on the part of respondent and that therefore, the demand is time barred. 3. After due process of law, the original authority allowed credit of ₹ 7,05,513/- and disallowed credit of ₹ 31,39,759/- Equal amount of penalty of ₹ 31,39,759/- was imposed. The respondent carried the issue in appeal and vide th .....

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