Tax Management India. Com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Case Laws Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Manuals Articles SMS News Highlights
        Home        
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

M/s Happy Forgings Pvt. Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Central Excise and another

2016 (7) TMI 898 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT

Cenvat Credit / Modvata Credit - purchase of tray casting as capital goods - Held that:- Once it is not in dispute that the petitioner is entitled to the benefit of the modvat credit on the eligible capital goods, namely, tray casting in the present case, as was clarified even by the department by issuing circular No. 276/110/96-TRU dated 2.12.1996, the denial thereof to the petitioner is totally illegal. Even if the petitioner had failed to refer to the circular at the time of hearing of the ap .....

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 AND MR. HARINDER SINGH SIDHU, JJ. For The Petitoner : Mr. Deepak Gupta, Advocate For The Respondent : Mr. Anshuman Chopra, Advocate Rajesh Bindal J. The grievance of the petitioner is that though it was entitled to benefit of modvat credit on purchase of tray casting used in the process of manufacture of tiny powder, in terms of circular No. 276/110/96-TRU dated 2.12.1996, however, the same was wrongly denied to it. The submission is that in October/November, 1997, the petitioner purchased tra .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

entral Excise & Customs, Chandigarh on 23.8.1999, while relying upon an earlier decision of the Customs, Excise & Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi (for short, 'the Tribunal') on the issue. The department preferred appeal before the Tribunal, which was allowed vide order dated 15.3.2000. The petitioner at that stage could not refer to the circular issued by the department entitling it to the benefit of modvat credit on purchase of tray casting. Immediately, rectificati .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

denied the benefit thereof. Merely because he had not been able to cite the circular at the relevant time, when the appeal was heard, though it was the duty of the counsel appearing for the department to have produced the same, the petitioner could not be denied the benefit admissible to it. Rather, the department should not have preferred the appeal against the order passed by the first Appellate Authority once the claim of the petitioner was in consonance with the circular issued by the depar .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

at the petitioner purchased tray casting. It is entitled to modvat credit on the duty paid on purchase thereof in terms of Rule 57Q of the Rules read with circular No. 276/110/96-TRU dated 2.12.1996. Initially, the department issued show cause notice dated 1.5.1998 to the petitioner proposing to deny the modvat credit. By passing the order, the Assistant Commissioner, Central Excise, Ludhiana, denied that benefit to the petitioner. This was despite the fact that the department had already issued .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Discussion Forum
what is new what is new
 
 


|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version