New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2016 (8) TMI 835 - CESTAT ALLAHABAD

2016 (8) TMI 835 - CESTAT ALLAHABAD - TMI - Demand - recovery of Cenvat credit on capital goods, Central excise duty alongwith interest and penalty and a short levy - credit was taken prior to receipt of input into the factory - Held that:- it is found that the CBEC Circular 645/36/2002-CX., dated 16.7.2002 provided that if the capital good are written off before use then the Cenvat credit availed has to be reversed. In the present case, there were no allegation that the capital goods were not u .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

lish that additional consideration was received by appellants. The levy required as per transaction value was discharged. Therefore, original order is not sustainable to extent of confirmation of Central Excise duty, interest thereon and penalty equal to the same. - Decided in favour of assessee with consequential relief - E/1170/2007-EX(DB) - Final Order No. 70282/2016 - Dated:- 10-6-2016 - Shri Anil Choudhary, Judicial Member and Shri Anil G. Shakkarwar, Member (Technical) Present for the Appe .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

nd on this account there was a proposal for recovery of ₹ 60,94,560/- (ii) During the period from October 2002 to March 2003 the appellant had taken Cenvat credit of ₹ 17,278/- before actual receipt of inputs. (iii) It was alleged that the appellant had incurred expenses of ₹ 45,568/- towards purchase of durable and returnable packaging for the period from August 2002 to July 2003 and allegation was that assessee has short paid Central Excise duty to tune of ₹ 7,291/- 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

also confirmed the demand of Central Excise duty of ₹ 7,291/and imposed penalty. 4. Aggrieved by the said Order-in-Original the appellant is before us. The contention of the appellant is that during the material period there were no provisions in Cenvat credit Rules or Central Excise Rules 1944 to reverse Cenvat credit on Capital Goods if the Capital Goods were not removed from the factory and they were simply written off in the books of account. The appellant agreed that credit of ₹ .....

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