Subscription   Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Articles Highlights TMI Notes SMS News Newsletters Calendar Imp. Links Database Experts Contact us More....
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

M/s India Cement Ltd. Versus The Commissioner, C & C.E, Hyderabad-II

Cement - cement clinker - CENVAT credit - structural items/TOR steel items like MS Angles, channels, plates, sheets, Rebar coils etc - capital goods - Held that: - reliance placed on the appellant's own case CCE, Tirunelveli Vs India Cements Ltd. [2006 (1) TMI 445 - CESTAT, CHENNAI], where it was held that credit availed on MS items used for fabrication/erection of capital goods is admissible. - Following the propositions laid in the appellants own case, I hold that the denial of credit is u .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

in manufacture of cement and cement clinker and are registered with Central Excise Department. They are availing Cenvat credit on capital goods and inputs. During the month of April, 2010 the appellants availed CENVAT credit of duty amounting to ₹ 38,231/-, being the balance 50% of the capital goods credit relating to the period 01-04-2009 to 06-07-2009, on structural items/TOR steel items like MS Angles, channels, plates, sheets, Rebar coils etc. A show cause notice dated 19-04-2011 was .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

llant is before the Tribunal. 3. On behalf of the appellant, the learned counsel Shri G.Prahlad submitted that the period involved is prior to 07-07-2009, when the Explanation was introduced to Rule 2(k) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. In connection with expansion project, the appellants had to build and install a number of new machines, conveyors system, storage silos, and all necessary capital goods. Adverting to para 10 of the impugned order, he urged that the first appellate authority has obse .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

duced to establish the details and quantity of subject items used. That there is no specific column in ER-1 returns to declare details of usage of each item. That appellants have furnished copies of purchase orders, statement showing exact use of items along with issue slips and purchase requisites. That these would be sufficient evidence to show that subject items were used for capital goods. He pleaded that the appeal may be allowed. 4. Refuting the above contentions, the learned AR Shri A.K.N .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Therefore, though the period in the present case is 01-04-2009 to 06-07-2009, the credit is not admissible. 5. I have heard the rival submissions. It is correct that in para 10 of the impugned order the Commissioner (appeals) has observed that credit is admissible that if subject structural items are used for fabrication of any capital goods/parts/accessories/components/and used in factory. In the reply to show cause notice, the appellants have stated that steel items were used in fabrication 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

 

 

 

 

 

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


|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

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

Go to Mobile Version