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

2016 (8) TMI 1016 - CESTAT CHENNAI

2016 (8) TMI 1016 - CESTAT CHENNAI - TMI - Recovery of interest and imposition of penalty - Rule 15 (2) of CCR 204 read with Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944 - period from the date of availing of credit upto the date of filing of the revised return - simultaneous availment of depreciation under the Income Tax Act and credit under cenvat scheme during the Assessment year 2007-08 & 2008-09 - filed revised return for the assessment years 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009-10 and 2010-11 on 23.3.201 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

artly in favour of appellant - E/40006/2013 - FINAL ORDER No.40867/2016 - Dated:- 27-5-2016 - Shri P.K. Choudhary, Judicial Member Shri M. Kannan, Advocate - For the Appellant Shri P. Anbuchelvan, Superintendent (AR) - For the Respondent ORDER The appellant herein have availed the credit of ₹ 1,24,302/- on capital goods on 1.9.2006, 1.12.2006 and 1.4.2007. They have also availed depreciation under the Income Tax Act during the Assessment year 2007-08 & 2008-09. Subsequently, the audit .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

O and dismissed the appeal. Hence the present appeal. 2. Appellant is represented by Shri M. Kannan, Advocate and Revenue is represented by Shri P. Anbuchelvan, Superintendent (A.R). 3. Ld. counsel submits that since the income tax returns have been revised, they are therefore eligible to avail the credit and demanding of interest is not warranted. In support of his submissions, he relied on the following decisions :- (1) CCE & Cus. Surat-II Vs Nish Fibres 2010 (257) ELT 81 (Guj.) (2) CCE Be .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

bove irregularity was noticed. Thereafter the appellants have revised their IT returns foregoing the benefit already availed by them during the financial year 2007-08. He reiterated the findings of the Commissioner (Appeals) and submits that decision of the tribunal in the case of Yee Kay Technocrat (P) Ltd. Vs CCE Delhi - 2011 (267) ELT 92 (Tri.-Del.) is squarely applicable to the facts of this case. The limitation has to be reckoned with reference to the obligation on the part of the assessee .....

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