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 Krishna Steel Rolling Mills Versus CCE, Ludhiana

2016 (7) TMI 595 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH

Cenvat credit denied - description of the goods disclosed in the invoice as M/S. Scrap which is not the raw material for the appellant - Held that:- Appellant has been able to obtain the certificate from the Range Superintendent of supplier of goods .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

was considered, the cenvat credit could have been allowed but the authorities below have not done so but confirmed the demand against the appellant. As description of goods have been explained satisfactorily with documentary evidence, in that circum .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

l, Advocate, for the appellant Shri K. Poddar, A.R., for the respondent ORDER The appellant is in appeal against the impugned order denying cenvat credit to the appellant on the premises that description of the goods disclosed in the invoice as M/S. .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

cription of the goods, it was shown as M/S Scrap which was not noticed by the appellant. During the course of audit, it was found that description of goods is mentioned as M.S. Scrap which is not the raw material for manufacturing of MS Round by the .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

terest and equivalent amount of penalty was also imposed. Aggrieved from the said order, the appellant is before me. 3. The Ld. Counsel for the appellant submits that it was an abundant mistake of the supplier of input, this fact has been certified b .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

hand, the Ld. AR reiterated the finding in the impugned order. 5. Heard the parties and considered the submissions. 6. On careful consideration of the submissions made by the Ld. Counsel, I find that in this case cenvat credit sought to be denied on .....

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