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 →

Commissioner of Central Excise, Customs and Service Tax-DAMAN Versus M/s Ssf Plastic Industries

2016 (11) TMI 1168 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD

Demand of differential duty - Capital goods cleared as such - whether on clearance of the capital goods after being put to use for more than six years, the CENVAT credit availed at the time of its receipt, should be reversed or the duty on the depreciated value of the capital goods as on the date of clearance from the factory be required to be paid? - Held that: - the CBEC Circulars issued from time to time, clarified that the depreciated value be considered for recovery of the CENVAT credit on .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

he facts to the department, the ld. Consultant for Respondent submits they may be allowed a chance to place necessary evidences during the remand proceeding before the adjudicating authority and requested that all issues be kept open. - Appeal allowed by way of remand. - E/452/2010 - A/11171/2016 - Dated:- 20-10-2016 - Dr. D. M. Misra, Member (Judicial) For Appellant (s) : Shri J. Nagori, Authorised Representative For Respondent (s) : Shri Nitin N. Mehta, Consultant ORDER This is an appeal 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

1,83,600/- in July 2006 on the transaction value of the said capital goods. The Revenue issued a demand notice for recovery of differential amount of ₹ 10,03,472/- with proposal for penalty alleging that since the goods were cleared as such accordingly, CENVAT credit availed at the time of receipt of the said capital goods was required to be reversed . On adjudication, the demand was confirmed alongwith penalty of equal amount. Aggrieved by the said order, the Respondent preferred an appe .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ut to use and not cleared as such. He submits that in any case, the duty cannot be paid on the transaction value, in view of the judgements of Madras High Court in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Salem vs. Rogini Mills Ltd. 2011 (264) E.L.T. 367 (Mad.) and the Larger Bench of the decision of this Tribunal in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Hyderabad-III vs. Navodhaya Plastic Industries Ltd. 2013 (298) E.L.T. 541 (Tri.-LB). He submits the duty should have been paid on 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