Tax Management India. Com
                        Law and Practice: A Digital eBook ...

Category of Documents

TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Case Laws Acts Notifications Circulars Classification Forms Manuals SMS News Articles
Highlights
D. Forum
What's New

Share:      

        Home        
 

TMI Blog

Home List
← Previous Next →

2018 (4) TMI 591

y paid on inputs and capital goods procured by respondent and supplied to BPL for generation of power or otherwise? - Held that: - the respondent is eligible for the availment of CENVAT credit of the service tax paid on GTA service and Central Excise duty paid on the input, and capital goods as there being no dispute that the power plant is within the factory premises and the 'factory premises' defined under Section 2(a) of the Central Excise Act wherein it is defined as factory includes any premises including precincts thereof, wherein or in any part of which excisable goods other than salt are manufactured. - Order of the Tribunal in the case of Steel Authority of India Ltd [2016 (3) TMI 153 - CESTAT NEW DELHI] would squarely appl .....

X X X X X X X

Full Text of the Document

X X X X X X X

nputs, capital goods for such power plant is ineligible on the ground that the power plant is not belonging to the respondent. 4. The respondent was issued with a show cause notice for the reversal of such an amount for credit. The show cause notice was contested by the respondent on the ground that BPL is their own group company and the power plant is within the factory premises as per the definition of the factory in the Central Excise Act and the power generated therein was consumed only by the respondent and not wheeled to the grid. The adjudicating authority did not agree with the contentions and after following due process of law, held that the respondent is not eligible to avail CENVAT credit. On an appeal the first appellate. author .....

X X X X X X X

Full Text of the Document

X X X X X X X

n plant which is in the name of BPL is installed in the same premises and constitutes same factory as approved by the excise authorities in the ground plan. He submits that the issue is now squarely settled by the Tribunal in the case of Steel Authority of India Ltd v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Raipur [2016 (332 ELT 825 (Tri.De1.)] and Dhampur sugar Mills v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Meerut [2001 (129) ELT 73 (Tri. Del.)] which is upheld by the apex Court as reported in 2007 (216) ELT A23 (SC). He would submit that in the case of Dhampur Sugar Mills Ltd (supra) similar issue was agitated before the Tribunal and the Tribunal held that the factory premises may contain different plants manufacturing different excisable goods and in .....

X X X X X X X

Full Text of the Document

X X X X X X X

ses' defined under Section• 2(a) of the Central Excise Act wherein it is defined as factory includes any premises including precincts thereof, wherein or in any part of which excisable goods other than salt are manufactured. 10. If this definition has to be considered then the appeal of Revenue does not have any legal standing as there is no dispute as to the power plant and the factory premises of the respondent are one and the same. 11. There is also no dispute as to the fact that the service tax paid on the transportation of the coal which is brought to the factory premises of the respondent and the inputs and the capital goods are also used by the power plant for generation of electricity which is consumed by the respondent wit .....

X X X X X X X

Full Text of the Document

X X X X X X X

seen that similar view was expressed by the Tribunal in the case of Dharampur Sugar Mills Ltd (supra), the decision which has been upheld by the apex Court wherein the apex Court, while dismissing the appeal filed by the Revenue recorded the following: "We do not find any merit in this civil appeal filed by the Department. Apart from the reasons given in the impugned judgment by the Tribunal, we find that in the present case, the show cause notice given by the Department itself proceeds on the basis that the factory of the assessee consisted of different units (plants); that it was one single factory consisting of separate units; that sugar and molasses came under one of the units, paper and paper board came in the other unit and that .....

X X X X X X X

Full Text of the Document

X X X X X X X

 

 

← Previous Next →

 

 

|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || Database || Members || Refer Us ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.
|| Blog || Site Map - Recent || Site Map ||