GST Helpdesk   Subscription   Demo   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2016 (12) TMI 1533 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT

2016 (12) TMI 1533 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT - TMI - Reversal of credit - Rule 6(3)(b) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2002 - Held that: - considering the fact that while passing the impugned judgement and order the learned tribunal has relied upon the decision of the Larger Bench of the learned tribunal in the case of Nicholas Piramal (India) Limited [2008 (4) TMI 744 - CESTAT, MUMBAI], which subsequently has been reversed / set aside by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the recent decision COMMISSIONER .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

this Court in the case of Shree Rama Multi Tech Ltd. [2011 (2) TMI 575 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT], it is observed that if the respondent makes an application within a period of one month from today with supporting documents for getting benefits of amended Rule 6 of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2002, as amended by Finance Act, 2010, the same be considered in accordance with law and on merits and in light of the amended Rule 6 of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2002, as amended by Finance Act, 2010. - Appeal .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

has preferred the present Tax Appeal to consider the following substantial question of law :- I. Whether in the facts and the circumstances of the case, the assessee was required to pay an amount equal to 8% of the total price of the exempted goods, as per Rule 6(3)(b) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2002, as the inputs were used in the manufacture of dutiable and exempted final goods and exempted goods? II. Whether the Ld. CESTAT was right in allowing the assessee for the subsequent reversal of 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

tribunal in the case of Nicholas Piramal (India) Limited, reported in 2008-TIOL-614- CESTAT-MUM. 4.00. It is not in dispute that the aforesaid decision of the learned tribunal has been subsequently reversed / set aside by the Hon ble Bombay High Court in the decision reported in 2009 (244) ELT 321. 5.00. Under the aforesaid circumstances, the impugned judgement and order passed by the learned tribunal cannot sustained and the same deserves to be quashed and set aside. 6.00. At this stage, Mr.Mod .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

lf of the respondent has submitted that for that the respondent was required to approach the appropriate authority within a period of six months from the date of Finance Act, 2010. However, at the relevant time, the respondent did not approach the appropriate authority within a period of six month as there was already a decision in favour of the respondent which was subject matter before this Court. Therefore, he has requested to make suitable observation while quashing and setting aside the imp .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 



|| 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