TMI Blog2021 (6) TMI 398X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... efit claimed by the appellant i.e. 100% availment of Cenvat Credit on the capital goods purchased in the year 2013-14 and 2014-15 and also claiming depreciation thereupon has actually been surrendered by the appellant or not. Infact Rule 4(4) of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 do not permit CENVAT Credit in respect of part of value of capital which represents duty of amount on such capital goods or which the manufacturer or producer of output service claims as depreciation under section 32 of the Income Tax Act. The adjustment in the balance sheet of 2015-16 cannot be considered as reversion of the depreciation claimed in the balance sheet of the year 2013-14 and 2014-15 - there is no infirmity in the findings of the Commissioner (Appeals) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on the capital goods which were capitalised in the balance sheet at full invoice value inclusive of Excise duty and have also claimed depreciation thereupon. Accordingly, the Cenvat credit was proposed to be disallowed and to be recovered along with interest and proportionate penalty. The said proposal was rejected vide Order-in-Original No. 20/2018-19 dated 20.06.2018 and appeal was preferred before the Commissioner (Appeals) by the department which has been allowed vide the impugned order under challenge. Being aggrieved, the appellant is before this Tribunal. 2. I have heard Ms J Kainnat, learned Counsel appearing for the appellant and Shri P Juneja, learned Authorised Representative appearing for the department. 3. Learned Counse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he rectification of alleged availment has been made in the balance sheet for the 2015-16. 7. It is also observed that when the appellant was subsequently asked about the said adjustment to have been made in the balance sheet for the year 2015-16 and 14-15, the appellant did not respond nor submitted any revised balance sheet for the aforesaid period. In absence thereof, it actually remained unclear as to whether the double benefit claimed by the appellant i.e. 100% availment of Cenvat Credit on the capital goods purchased in the year 2013-14 and 2014-15 and also claiming depreciation thereupon has actually been surrendered by the appellant o not. Infact Rule 4(4) of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 do not permit CENVAT Credit in respect of part ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
