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

2016 (6) TMI 669 - CESTAT KOLKATA

2016 (6) TMI 669 - CESTAT KOLKATA - TMI - CENVAT credit denied - input service invoices were tampered by affixing their rubber stamp on the same - Held that:- The consignee address was initially mentioned as the head office of the Appellant but later corrected by the consignor, by mentioning the factory address of the consignee, with due endorsement by affixing the rubber stamp of the consignor. Assuming that the rubber stamp was affixed after providing the service infirmity in the said invoices .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ossession with all the relevant evidences by which they could establish that the input services mentioned in the respective invoices were received and utilized in or in relation to the manufacture of the final product. To ascertain the said fact, in my opinion, the matter needs to be remanded to the adjudicating authority only for the limited purpose to ascertain whether the input services were received and utilized in or in relation to the manufacture of the final product - Appeal No. EA-416/12 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

to March, 2011 amounting to ₹ 58,06,152/-. On adjudication the ld. Commissioner has dropped major portion of the demand, but confirmed demand of ₹ 4,89,013/- and imposed penalty of equivalent amount. Hence, the present Appeal. 3. The ld. Consultant Shri B. N. Chattopadhyay for the appellant submits that out of the said demand of ₹ 4,89,013, the ld. Commissioner has confirmed demand of ₹ 4,68,567/- on the alleged ground that the relevant input service invoices were tamper .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ically submits that the input services mentioned in the respective invoices had been duly received and utilized in their factory, hence satisfies the definition of input service prescribed at Rule 2(l) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004, therefore CENVAT Credit cannot be denied against those invoices. 4. Per contra, the ld.AR for the Revenue, on the other hand submits that the adjudicating authority besides observing that CENVAT Credit on the invoices is not admissible as the invoices were tampere .....

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