Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2017 (5) TMI 137

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... another unit and are returned back to the first unit and from there it is cleared on payment of duty and this arrangement has been informed to the department - CENVAT credit on security services received at Unit-II cannot be denied on the ground that the same is not used by the manufacturer, as both the units belong to the same manufacturer and both are connected and integrated units - Similarly, the other issue that capital goods were not used in the factory is also not sustainable. The denial of credit on capital goods on the ground that the appellant have taken the 100% credit in the first year itself instead of 50%, the denial of 100% credit is also not sustainable because in the subsequent financial year, the appellant is entitled t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... appeal No. E/21047/2014. The appellants are engaged in the manufacture of ferrous castings and patterns classifiable under Chapter Subheading 7325 9910 and 8480 3000 of Central Excise Tariff Act (CETA), 1985 and are availing CENVAT credit on various inputs/capital goods and input services in terms of CENVAT Credit Rules (CCR), 2004. During the period in dispute, the appellant had a factory at Plot No.28, B-H, KIADB Industrial Area, Hoskote, Bangalore, which is duly registered with the jurisdictional Central Excise authorities. Due to shortage of space in the first unit (registered factory), the appellant took another premises on lease which is very much situated in the same area by Plot No.53-B, KIADB Industrial Area, Hoskote, Bangalore (th .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the security service in first appeal No. E/21045/2014 used at the another unit of the appellant and the capital goods were used at the another unit of the appellant in other two appeals and further, in appeal No. E/21046/2014, 100% credit was availed on capital goods in violation of the Rules, is not sustainable in law. He further submitted that the whole approach of the Commissioner (A) while passing the impugned order is wrong. He also submitted that in order to carry out certain operations on their intermediate goods, the appellant had taken an additional premises near their registered premises on lease wherein the semi-finished goods were sent for processing and after the processing, the same was returned to the main unit whereas the C .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... appeal, which was received at the second unit. The said security service is an input service and can be received even outside the factory premise and the only condition is that it should be received by the manufacturer. In the present case, both the units belong to the same manufacturer and both are connected and integrated units. Hence denial of CENVAT credit on security service used in second unit of the appellant is not justified and in support of this submission, he relied upon the following authorities: i. MRF Ltd. vs. CCE: 2013 (31) STR 689 (Tri.-Chennai) ii. Vako Seals Pvt. Ltd. vs. CCE: 2015 (40) STR 594 (Tri.-Mum.) iii. CCE vs. Ultratech Cement Ltd.: 2012 (278) ELT 523 (Tri.-Mum.) iv. Deepak Fertilizers Petroch .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... pital goods in appeal No. E/21046/2014 i.e., the appellant took 100% credit in the first year itself instead of 50% and the entire credit is denied. In regard to this, the appellant submitted that though 100% credit availed was not correct but the credit cannot be denied entirely since in the next financial year, the appellant is entitled to take credit. As regards the interest, the appellant submits that though they took 100% credit in the first financial year but they had used the CENVAT credit balance and they never utilized the credit availed 100% in the first year itself, hence the demand of interest is not sustainable. 5. On the other hand, the learned AR reiterated the findings of the impugned orders. 6. After considering the s .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates