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

2016 (9) TMI 184 - CESTAT MUMBAI

2016 (9) TMI 184 - CESTAT MUMBAI - TMI - Availment of modvat/cenvat credit - duty paid on various inputs on the basis of the supplementary invoices raised by the suppliers - supplementary invoices/57E certificates were never considered as valid duty paying documents during the period 1.4.2000 to 29.8.2000 - Held that:- it is undisputed that the supplementary invoices/57E certificates were issued by the concerned range authorities in respect of discharge of duty liability of goods which were alre .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

he 57E certificates. It is well settled law that cenvat credit is a beneficial legislation, hence the benefit which is due to the appellant should not be curtailed due to want/error of the drafting in legislation. - It is found that this error of eligibility to avail cenvat credit on the 57E certificates/supplementary invoices was rectified by issuance of Notification 51/2000-CE(NT) on 29.8.2000 which was considered by the Tribunal in the case of Eicher Ltd. vs. CCE, Chennai [2003 (7) TMI 1 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

2. The issue involved in this case is regarding availment of modvat/cenvat credit of duty paid on various inputs on the basis of the supplementary invoices raised by the suppliers during the period 1.4.2000 to 29.8.2000. It is the case of the Revenue in the show cause notice that during the material period, supplementary invoices/57E certificates were never considered as valid duty paying documents, hence cenvat credit availed has to be reversed by the appellant. The show cause notice was issue .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

redit. The adjudicating authority, after following due process of law, did not agree with the contentions raised, accordingly confirmed the demands raised along with interest and also imposed penalty. 4. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant draws our attention to the facts of the case. He would submit that prior to 1.4.2000 and post 29.8.2000, cenvat credit was available on supplementary invoices raised by the supplier subject to conditions. He would submit that in the case in hand, t .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

on identical issue and in respect of the very same Notification, the Tribunal in the case of Eicher Ltd. vs. CCE, Chennai 2003 (156) ELT 485, has held that Notification No.51/2000-CE(NT) is clarificatory in nature and cenvat credit can be availed on the supplementary invoices during the period 1.4.2000 to 29.8.2000. 5. The learned departmental representative would submit that the provisions of erstwhile Central Excise Rules very clearly indicate that cenvat credit can be availed only on the docu .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

s and perusal of records, we find that the issue involved is regarding denial of cenvat credit to the appellant on the supplementary invoices/57E certificates during the period 1.4.2000 to 29.8.2000. It is undisputed that the supplementary invoices/57E certificates were issued by the concerned range authorities in respect of discharge of duty liability of goods which were already dispatched from the factory of the supplier and the supplementary invoices were raised to pay the differential duty d .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

he benefit which is due to the appellant should not be curtailed due to want/error of the drafting in legislation. We find that this error of eligibility to avail cenvat credit on the 57E certificates/supplementary invoices was rectified by issuance of Notification 51/2000-CE(NT) on 29.8.2000. 8. The very same Notification was being considered by the Tribunal in the case of Eicher Ltd. (supra), wherein the Tribunal has held as under:- This appeal arises from Order-in-Appeal No. 68/2002 (M-I), da .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ubmits that the Notification No. 51/2000-N.T., dated 29-8-2000 was a clarificatory in nature and was having retrospective effect. This is the view expressed by the Larger Bench in the case of Tata Engineering Locomotive v. CCE reported in 1996 (87) E.L.T. 157. Ld. Counsel submits that in this citation Larger Bench has interpreted an identical situation arising under Rule 57E of the Modvat Rules. He submits that the Madras High Court judgment rendered in the case of CCE, Madras v. Home Ashok Leyl .....

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