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 →

CCE, Chandigarh Versus M/s Nectar Lifesciences Ltd., (Unit-II)

2016 (11) TMI 866 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH

CENVAT credit - goods namely pre-fabricated building and building structures - user test - reliance placed in the decision in the case of Vandana Global Ltd. Vs. CCE [2010 (4) TMI 133 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI (LB)] - Held that: - the cenvat credit was denied to the respondent relying on the decision 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 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

test, the respondent is entitled to avail the cenvat credit up to the period 07.07.2009. As the issue of availment 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 - appeal dismissed - decided against Revenue. - Appeal No. E/Co/2369/2012 in E/1144/2012-Ex(SM) - FINAL ORDER 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

01.2009 to 30.11.2009 alleging that the respondent has wrongly availed cenvat credit of ₹ 15,87,737/- under the category of goods on goods namely pre-fabricated building and building structures. The matter was adjudicated, demand on account of denial of cenvat credit was confirmed along with interest and equivalent amount of penalty was imposed on the respondent. The order was challenged before the Id. Commissioner (A) who drops the penalty against the respondent. Aggrieved from the said o .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

4. On the other hand, the Ld. Counsel for the respondent opposed the contention of the Ld. AR and submits that Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Mundra Ports and Special Economic Zone ltd. vs. CCE 2015 (39) STR 726 (Guj) held that the decision of Larger bench view in Vandana Global Ltd. (Supra) was based on conjectures and surmises. He further submits that as per the decision of Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Surya Alloy Industries Ltd., vs. UOI 2014 (305) ELT 47 (Cal .....

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