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

2016 (10) TMI 106 - CESTAT ALLAHABAD

2016 (10) TMI 106 - CESTAT ALLAHABAD - TMI - Section 35 B of Central Excise Act, 1944 - amount of duty involved is less then ₹ 50,000/- Reversal of Cenvat credit - Cenvat credit taken on MS Plate, Channels, Angles etc. treating the same as capital goods - used for repair and maintenance of Plant and Machinery - Held that:- the provisions of Section 35 B of Central Excise Act, 1944 provide that the Tribunal in its discretion can refuse to admit an appeal where duty or differential duty or f .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

has to be denied. I find that the impugned goods do not satisfy the definition of Capital Goods in said Cenvat Credit Rules 2004 and merely by such mention in the books of account, they do not loose the substantive eligibility to be treated as inputs. Further, I find that the original authority has gone through the material requisition slips and found as to where the impugned goods are used for maintenance and repair of machinery. Therefore, I do not find the two observations of ld. Commissioner .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

f schedule to Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. The appellant has taken Cenvat credit of ₹ 46,000/- on MS Plate, Channels, Angles etc. treating the same as capital goods. It appeared to Revenue that the said credit is inadmissible since the same do not qualified as capital goods under Cenvat credit Rules, 2004. Therefore, a show cause notice dated 20/08/2013 was issued for reversal of said Cenvat credit with other proposals. The appellant submitted before the original authority that by over .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

the Commissioner (Appeals). Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) has held that the appellant has made only general claim regarding use of MS Plate, Channels, Angles for repair and maintenance without specifying as to which items were used for repair and maintenance of which machine and also held that it is undisputed that the impugned goods were claimed to the capital goods and set-aside Order-in-Original through impugned Order-in-Appeal dated 22/4/2014. 3. The appellant challenged the Order-in-Appeal 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

cause notice is hit by limitation. 4. The appellant has reiterated the contention in the ground of appeal. The ld. DR as raised the objection that amount of duty involved is less then ₹ 50,000/- and pleaded that the appeal need not been entertained. Further, he reiterated the finding of First Appellate Authority. He has relied on the Tribunal ruling in case of U.G. Sugar & Industries Ltd. reported at 2014 (311) E.L.T. 665 (Tri.-Del.) and argued that Tribunal in the said case has held .....

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