Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India. Com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Home Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Case Laws Manuals Short Notes Articles News Highlights
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

Tractor and Farm Equipment Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, & ST

2016 (11) TMI 511 - CESTAT CHENNAI

Recovery of improperly availed CENVAT credit - Rule 3 (1) and Rule 9 (1) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 - Held that: - the appellants have reversed the credit based on a wrong advice at the time of internal audit which subsequently was found to be wrong and accordingly they took re-credit. This is only a technical adjustment. I find that the issue at hand is fully covered by decision of this very Tribunal in the case of Godrej Sara Lee Ltd. Vs CCE Pune [2012 (9) TMI 166 - CESTAT, CHENNAI] where it .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

N. Viswanathan, Advocate For the Appellant Shri R. Subramaniyan, AC (AR) For the Respondent ORDER The facts of the case are that appellant, on being pointed out by internal audit of the department of excess credit availed by them, had reversed an amount of ₹ 17,52,664/- with interest on 2.4.2009. As per the learned counsel, the said reversal of credit was advised by department, on the ground that the total credit availed was more than the calculation of 16% Excise Duty. Subsequently, on th .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Original authority has confirmed the proposed demand which has been upheld by the Commissioner (Appeals) also. Hence this appeal. 2. Ld. Counsel submits that the credit taken by them was very much in order since it was part of the original invoice against which the credit was passed on to them by their sister unit. The amount was initially reversed only because of being wrongly advised that the same was incorrectly calculated. He placed reliance on the ratio of the judgement of the Hon ble High .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

bsequently was found to be wrong and accordingly they took re-credit. This is only a technical adjustment. I find that the issue at hand is fully covered by decision of this very Tribunal in the case of Godrej Sara Lee Ltd. Vs CCE Pune 2012 (26) STR 417 (Tri.-Chennai). The relevant portions of the above Tribunal's order are reproduced herein for reference :- "6. However, I find that the present case is quite different. This is a case where the appellants had taken credit of service tax .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

such, the audit objection and the subsequent instruction of the departmental authorities which prompted the appellants to reverse the credit and pay the interest were clearly wrong. The Board has also accepted this position, while issuing a subsequent circular, dated 23-8-2007 in paragraph 8.3 thereof. As such, the erroneous reversal made by the appellants, prompted by wrong audit objection and an inapplicable circular, has been rectified by the appellants by taking the suo motu credit of the r .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Forum
what is new what is new
  ↓     bird's eye view     ↓  


|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version