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

2016 (9) TMI 362 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD

2016 (9) TMI 362 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD - TMI - Cenvat credit - availed amounting to ₹ 1,35,133/- involved on the inputs lying in stock and the inputs contained in the finished goods as on that date - input quantity involving credit of ₹ 61,953/- was not available in stock as on 14.03.2011 - Imposition of penalty - Held that:- I do not find any reason to interfere with the finding of the learned Commissioner (Appeals) that the CENVAT Credit of ₹ 61,953/- is inadmissible against 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

consider the option of payment of 25% of the penalty on fulfillment of the conditions laid down under Section 11AC of Central Excise Act, 1944. - Decided partly in favour of assessee - Appeal No. E/12073/2013-SM - Order No. A/10835/2016 - Dated:- 31-8-2016 - Dr. D.M. Misra, Member (Judicial) For the Appellant: Shri K.C. Rathod, Consultant For the Respondent: Shri N. Satwani, A.R. ORDER Per Dr. D.M. Misra Heard both sides. 2. This appeal is filed against OIA No.60/2013(Ahd-III)/SKS/Commr.(A)/Ahd .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

e finished goods as on that date. On verification, it was found that the input quantity involving credit of ₹ 61,953/- was not available in stock as on 14.03.2011. Accordingly, a Show Cause Notice was issued to them for disallowing the credit wrongly availed, with a proposal for imposition of penalty. On adjudication, the demand was confirmed and penalty imposed. Aggrieved by the said order, the Appellants preferred an appeal before the learned Commissioner (Appeals), who in turn, upheld 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

d was pertaining to period prior to 3-4 months, cannot be sustained. 5. Per contra, the learned Authorised Representative for the Revenue submitted that after due verification by the Department, from the total claim of ₹ 1,35,133/- no evidence could be placed before the Adjudicating authority on receipt of the inputs involving credit of ₹ 61,953/-. The Adjudicating authority has recorded a finding that out of the total quantity of raw material consumed, approximately 90% of it was no .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

idered the submissions advanced by both sides and perused the records. I find that the learned Commissioner (Appeals), after analyzing the evidences, recorded his finding supported by the evidences on record about the inadmissibility of CENVAT Credit of ₹ 61,953/- against the total claim of ₹ 1,35,133/-. At Para 6 of the order, it is recorded as under:- 6. The sub-rule 2 of Rule 3 of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 provides: (2) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-rule (1), the manuf .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ned in final products lying in stock on which any goods manufactured by the said manufacturer. The Appellant has obtained Central Excise registration on 14.03.2011 and intimated regarding the availment of CENVAT Credit of ₹ 1,35,133/- on inputs lying in stock and inputs contained in the finished goods at the time of obtaining registration. During the course of verification of stock position of inputs as on 14.03.2011 and the month wise account for the year 2010-11, it has been observed tha .....

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