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, Mumbai Versus Ritex Overseas

2017 (9) TMI 451 - CESTAT MUMBAI

CENVAT credit - revenue argued that the appellants are not involved in the manufacturing activities - Held that: - it is a fact that the appellants have availed Cenvat Credit and paid the Central Excise duty and exported goods and also claimed rebate on the exported goods. Revenue has not challenged the payment of duty on the exported goods and also not challenged sanction of rebate claims sanctioned to the appellants. In these circumstances, the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Hino Moto .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

demanded in spite of the fact that the activity undertaken by the appellant does not amount to manufacture. - Appeal dismissed - decided against Revenue. - E/87500/13 - A/89333/17/SMB - Dated:- 6-9-2017 - Mr. Raju, Member (Technical) Shri.Ajay Kumar, Jt. Comm. (AR) for appellant Shri.R.V. Shetty, Advocate for respondent ORDER Per : Raju 1. This appeal has been filed by the Revenue. 2. The respondents were denied the Cenvat by the adjudicating authority, however the Commissioner (Appeals) al .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

rying out manufacturing activity on the yarns in the factory. He pointed out that the respondents were registered with Central Excise with effect from 30/01/2005 for manufacturing of man-made fabrics and cotton fabrics. They were availing Cenvat Credit on the inputs, namely, single/double yarn and grey fabrics. He pointed out that the investigations revealed that doubling machine was purchased in the month of December 2004. From the electricity consumption during January 2005 to July 2005 it app .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

n the export clearances. From the statement of the weaver master of the respondent, it transpires that no manufacturing facility carried out in their factory. The weaving master was looking after the receipt of the yarn checking of grey fabrics and processed fabrics and cutting and packing of processed fabrics and dispatch thereof. From the statement of Shri Ritesh Chokhani, Partner of the respondent it transpires that they were procuring yarn which was sent to weavers for production of yarn fab .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

the Notification No.214/86 for a manufacturer and Rule 4 (5) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. 4.1 Ld. AR argued that since no manufacturing activities was conducted by the respondents, they were not entitled to take any Cenvat Credit whatsoever and consequently Ld. AR argued that demand has been wrongly dropped by the Commissioner (Appeals). Ld. AR argued that after deletion of Rule 12B vide Notification No.11/2004-CE(NT) dated 09/07/2004, such facility to the manufacturer of textile articles was 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

out that all the activities were happening with the knowledge of Central Excise Officers. He pointed out that they are exporting 100% of their product and were following ARE-1 procedures, they were submitting duplicate copy of the same. He argued that though rebate has been sanctioned to them, the said orders of sanction of rebate have not been challenged by the Revenue thereby admitting that the duty was rightly paid on the finished goods. He pointed out that if the duty was wrongly paid then t .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

any manufacturing activities they cannot be allowed to avail Cenvat Credit. On the other hand it is a fact that the appellants have availed Cenvat Credit and paid the Central Excise duty and exported goods and also claimed rebate on the exported goods. Revenue has not challenged the payment of duty on the exported goods and also not challenged sanction of rebate claims sanctioned to the appellants. In these circumstances, the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Hino Motors Sales India Pvt. .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

on final products. We note that appellant has paid the duty at the time of clearance of the vehicles. Keeping in view the judgment of the Bombay High Court in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Pune-III v. Ajinkya Enterprises reported in 2012-TIOL-578-HC-MUM-CX = 2013 (294) E.L.T. 203 (Bom.) has observed as under :- 10. Apart from the above, in the present case, the assessment on decoiled HR/CR coils cleared from the factory of the assessee on payment of duty has neither been reversed .....

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