Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2016 (11) TMI 866

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ecision of Vandana Global Ltd. holding that the explanation 2 to Rule 2(k) of the CCR, 2004 is clarificatory in nature and retrospectively applicable. The decision of the Larger Bench of this Tribunal in the case of Vandana Global Ltd. has been examined of the various Hon'ble High Courts and it has been held that it is not a good law. Further, in the case of Singhal Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. [2016 (9) .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... AL ORDER NO. 61550/2016 - Dated:- 25-10-2016 - Mr. Ashok Jindal, Member (Judicial) Sh. G.M. Sharma, AR- for the appellant Sh. Sudeep Singh, Advocate- for the respondent PER: ASHOK JINDAL The Revenue is in appeal and the respondent has also filed cross objection. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the respondent is engaged in the manufacturer of excisable goods falling .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... se of Vandana Global Ltd. Vs. CCE reported in 2010 (253) ELT 440 (T-LB) and the show cause notice was issued within the period of limitation, therefore, the penalty on the respondent is imposable. As the explanation 2 to Rule 2(k) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 dated 07.07.2009 is clarificatory in nature and retrospectively applicable. 4. On the other hand, the Ld. Counsel for the respondent .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... per the contemplated under Rule 2(a) of the CCR, 2004, therefore, cenvat credit duty on Welding Electrodes is allowed. Therefore, he prayed that the cross objection of the appeal is to be allowed and the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed. 5. Heard the parties and considered the submissions. 6. In this case the cenvat credit was denied to the respondent relying on the decision of Vand .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... t of credit was in dispute during the period, therefore, no penalty is imposable in the facts and circumstances of the case. In result, the respondent is entitled to avail cenvat credit on the steel items during the period 01.01.2009 to 07.07.2009 and no penalty Imposable. 7. With these terms, Revenue s appeal is dismissed and the cross objection filed by the respondent are partially allowed. .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates