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 →

M/s Capital Cars Pvt. Ltd. Versus C.C.E., Ghaziabad

2016 (11) TMI 580 - CESTAT ALLAHABAD

CENVAT credit - output service of maintenance and repair - Held that: - We find that going by the wording of the said Notification No.12/2003, there is no requirement of payment of VAT to become eligible for exemption in respect of said goods for availing the benefit of Notification No.12/2003. The notification provides that there should be documentary proof indicating the value of the goods sold so as to avail benefit of exemption of such value from the assessable value for arriving at service .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

it Rule 2004, that existed during the material period allowing the Cenvat Credit to the appellants. So, we direct Original Authority to re-adjudicate the matter taking into consideration the documentary proof of sale of goods and taking into consideration the provisions of said Rules 6(3) available during the material period. With these directions, we remand the matter back to the Original Authority by setting aside the Order-in-Original. The issue of limitation is kept open to be examined by 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

011-12 dated 18.08.2011. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the appellants are authorized dealer and service provider for maintenance of Honda Cars. While servicing the Car some parts are also sold. The appellants are registered for service tax and they avail Cenvat facility. They were issued with a show-cause-notice for the period from year 2005-06 to March 2010 through show cause notice No.05/Commr./ST/GZB/2010 dated 20.10.2010, wherein it was stated by Revenue that the appellants have so .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

roposals for interest and penalty. The appellants made submissions before the Original Authority, claiming benefit of Notification No.12/2003-ST dated 20th June, 2003, claiming that the value of the goods, i.e. parts and accessories sold during the servicing of the vehicles, were separately shown in the invoices and such value which represents the sale of goods, is exempted from levy of service tax through the said notification. In addition, they have contested the input services to be eligible .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

77; 4,74,12,925/- under Rule 14 of Cenvat Credit Rules and imposed penalties. 3. The appellants have challenged the said Order-in-original dated 18.08.2011, on the grounds that they were eligible for benefit of said Notification No.12/2003 and that out of the Cenvat Credit of ₹ 21,11,299/-, they were eligible for 20% of the credit as per Rule 6(3) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 till 01.04.2008 and, subsequently, they were eligible for proportionate Cenvat Credit which was attributable to 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

 

 

 

 

 

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