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 →

M/s Klipco Pvt. Ltd., Manoj Joshi Versus C.C.E. & S.T. Vapi

2017 (11) TMI 766 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD

CENVAT credit - capital goods which were later removed to their another unit engaged in their job work, without following any procedure laid down under CCR, 2004 - Held that: - The CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 specifically provides for such eventualities/situation whereunder inputs/ capital goods can be removed from the factory for job work and in the event, the inputs/capital goods are not returned within the period of 180 days, the assessee is required to reverse the cenvat credit - In the presen .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

-work they prepared annexure-II challans and followed the laid down procedure. Therefore, imposition of penalty is justified. - Considering the facts and circumstances, I do not find any reason to impose penalty on Shri Manoj Joshi under Rule 15 of the CCR. Accordingly, the appeal filed by the Sh. Manoj Joshi is allowed. - Appeal allowed in part. - Appeal No. E/12053-12054/2014-SM - Final Order No. A/ 13311-13312 /2017 - Dated:- 31-10-2017 - Dr. D. M. Misra, Member (Judicial) For the 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

removed against chits, without following the procedure laid down under Cenvat Credit Rules,2004, for carrying their job-work, to their another unit which was not registered with the Central Excise department. Alleging violation of the provisions of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 demand notice was issued on 24.08.2012 for recovery of the said credit along with interest and penalty. On adjudication, the demand was confirmed with interest and penalty; also personal penalty of ₹ 60,000/- imposed on .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

no. 60, for carrying out job work exclusively of their products. It is his contention that while removing the capital goods they have not followed any of the Central Excise Procedures. But, in any case, since the capital goods have been installed in their another unit, which is though not registered, but exclusively engaged in carrying out job work for their main unit, therefore, recovery of cenvat credit availed at the first unit is incorrect in view of the judgment of the Tribunal in the case .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. It is her contention that removal of capital goods to job worker is permissible under Rule 4(5)(a) of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 subject to the condition that the capital goods should return within 180 days from the date of initial removal. In the present case, the appellant had though removed the goods between 2007 and 2010, however the same were not received back in their factory where the credit has been availed. Therefore, the appellant is required to reverse the c .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

laid down under CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. The Contention of the Ld. Advocate that they need not follow any procedure since the capital goods had been removed to their, another premises which was engaged in exclusive job work of their product, in my opinion, is without any sound legal basis. 6. The CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 specifically provides for such eventualities/situation whereunder inputs/ capital goods can be removed from the factory for job work and in the event, the inputs/capital goo .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

e, and it is established from the records, challans or memos or any other document produced by the manufacturer or provider of output service taking the CENVAT credit that the goods are received back in the factory within one hundred and eighty days of their being sent to a job worker and if the inputs or the capital goods are not received back within one hundred eighty days, the manufacturer or provider of output service shall pay an amount equivalent to the CENVAT credit attributable to the in .....

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