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. Paper Packaging Pvt. Ltd., K.I.A.D.B. Industrial Area, Mandil Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Customs and Service Tax Mysore

2017 (3) TMI 301 - CESTAT BANGALORE

CENVAT credit - HR beams, sheets, channels, plates, falling under Chapter 72 of the Schedule to the CETA - Held that: - this case needs to be remanded back to the original authority to verify the actual use of the items alleged to have been stated by the appellant to have been used in the fabrication which is used for production of the paper - appeal allowed by way of remand. - E/21164/2015-SM - Final Order No. 20316 / 2017 - Dated:- 3-3-2017 - HON'BLE SHRI S.S GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER Mr. S.R. .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

, 2004. During the course of audit, it was observed that during the period from February 2013 to September 2013, appellant had availed CENVAT credit under capital goods account on the goods HR beams, sheets, channels, plates, falling under Chapter 72 of the Schedule to the CETA and computerized attendance recording system i.e., finger print reader falling under Tariff Heading 8471 3090 of CETA. Thereafter a show-cause notice proposing to recover the CENVAT credit wrongly availed was issued to 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

he learned counsel for the parties and perused the records. 4. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that as per Rule 2(l) of the CCR, 2004 clearly provides that CENVAT credit is eligible on the goods used in the factory of manufacture of final product and not used in the manufacture of final product. He further submitted that the appellants are eligible to avail CENVAT credit as per Notification No.67/95-CE dated 16.3.1995 for the fabrication of the machinery. He also submitted that the s .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ed that the assessee has placed on record only invoices and a certain photographs vaguely indicating how the items, in question were utilized without giving specific details as to what quantity of structural steel items was used in manufacture of machinery or its parts and components and accessories. Learned counsel in support of his submissions relied upon the following decisions: i. IOCL vs. CCE, Rohtak: 2014 (307) ELT 560 (Tri.-Del.) ii. Vishwanath Sugars Ltd. vs. CCE, Belgaum: 2009 (236) ELT .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

s own case vide Final Order No.21400/2016 dated 8.12.2016 had remanded the matter to the adjudicating authority for the previous period and he prayed that this matter may also be remanded to the original adjudicating authority. 5. On the other hand, the learned AR reiterated the findings in the impugned order and also relied upon following judgments: i. Saraswati Sugar Mills: 201 (270) ELT 465 (SC) ii. Madras Cements Ltd.: 2010 (254) ELT 3 (SC) iii. Madras Cements Ltd.: 2005 (192) ELT 902 (Tri.- .....

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