Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2016 (7) TMI 126

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... hout discussing the eligibility of individual items involved in the Appeal. Therefore, to meet the interest of justice, the Appeal has to be allowed and remanded to the CESTAT. - Decided in favor of Revenue. - C.M.A. No. 467 of 2010 - - - Dated:- 20-6-2016 - S. Manikumar And D. Krishnakumar, JJ. For the Appellant : Mr. A. P. Srinivas For the Respondent : Mr. S. Muthuvenkataraman JUDGMENT ( Judgment of the Court was delivered by D. Krishnakumar, J ) This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal arises against the Final Order No.219/2009 dated 13.2.2009 on the file of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, South Zonal Bench, Chennai. 2. Mr.A.P.Srinivas, learned Senior Standing Counsel for the appellant would sub .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... as they have wrongly availed the credit of duty paid on the components, accessories, equipments and spares of the Captive Power Plant which are not falling under any of the Chapter Headings specified in Rule 2(a)(A)(i) and (iii) of the Rules. 3. The Assessee submitted his reply dated 30.10.2006 and 21.8.2007 to the Assessing Authority stating that the various component machineries which are brought into the factory are by themselves capital goods as they individually fall under the chapter heading specified in the definition of capital goods and that the subject goods are used within the factory of production and they have not contravened Rule 6(1) and 6(4) of CCR 2004 inasmuch as their final products are sugar and molasses which are du .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 004. (iii) I impose a penalty of ₹ 7,11,18,829 (Seven Crore Elevan Lakh Eighteen Thousand Eight Hundred and Twenty Nine only) on the assessee under Rule 15 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 for wrongly taking the credit of duty paid on the goods which are used for installing the Captive Power Plant. 5. Aggrieved by the aforesaid order, the assessee had preferred the Appeal before the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, South Zonal Bench, Chennai. The Tribunal considered the detail order passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise by relying upon the decision of the Tribunal passed by the Mumbai Bench and allowed the Appeal filed by the assessee/respondent herein. 6. Aggrieved by the aforesaid Appeal, the Reven .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... al and granted relief without discussing the eligibility of individual items involved in the Appeal. Therefore, to meet the interest of justice, the Appeal has to be allowed and remanded to the CESTAT. 8. The learned counsel for the respondent submitted that in the event of allowing the appeal, the matter may be remanded to the adjudicating authority, to consider afresh. 9. The Learned counsel for both parties submitted that even if the matter is remanded to the Tribunal, the issue requires a fresh look by the adjudicating authority and therefore, while assailing the correctness of the order impugned, this Court can consider the above said submission. 10. Placing on record the above submissions and on the facts and circumstances of .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates