Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India. Com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Case Laws Manuals Short Notes Articles SMS News Highlights
        Home        
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

M/s Fena Pvt. Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Noida-II

2018 (2) TMI 784 - CESTAT, ALLAHABAD

Whether the show cause notice have been validly issued, invoking the extended period of limitation? - Held that: - there is no allegation in the SCN in the nature of concealment of facts or recording of wrong or misleading information in the records or books of accounts or any other contumacious conduct on the part of the appellant - it appeared that the assessee have taken the credit without any ulterior motive or with intention to evade payment of tax - Under these facts and circumstances, .....

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 brief facts of the case are that revenue had some intelligence that the appellant was evading payment of Central excise duty by way of undervaluation of their final products. Accordingly, there was inspection/search in the factory and office premises on 21st December, 2011, wherein the records were scrutinized and statement of responsible persons were recorded. During scrutiny of the records, it appeared to revenue that appellant have availed inadmissible Cenvat credit of service tax paid 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

under Rule 2(l) in view of the amendment in Rule 2(l) of CCR, 2004 with effect from 01/04/2011. 3. The SCN was adjudicated on contest and the proposed amount of disallowance confirmed along with other two small amounts along with interest and also equal amount of penalty of ₹ 22,35,258/- under Rule 15 (2) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. Being aggrieved, appellant preferred appeal before learned Commissioner (Appeals) who vide the impugned order took notice that the appellant is not contestin .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ccount is concerned, the same was upheld as disallowable. So far the invoices addressed to the head office credit amounting to ₹ 10,481/- the same was held to be allowable. The learned Commissioner (Appeals) further was pleased to reduce the amount of penalty to ₹ 17,57,906/- being amount relatable to Cenvat credit for the period on or after 01/04/2011 on Construction Services. 4. Being aggrieved, the appellant-assessee preferred appeal before this Tribunal, among others on the groun .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Discussion Forum
what is new what is new
 


Share:            

|| 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