TMI Blog2022 (2) TMI 247X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... egistration, it cannot be treated two separate entities, therefore, the cenvat credit on this ground cannot be denied. However the lower authorities have denied the Cenvat Credit relying on the Hon ble Supreme Court judgment in the case of M/S. MARUTI SUZUKI LTD. VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, DELHI-III [ 2009 (8) TMI 14 - SUPREME COURT] which was subsequently referred to the Larger Bench in the case of COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, VADODARA VERSUS GUJARAT NARMADA VALLEY FERTILIZERS COMPANY LTD. [ 2012 (12) TMI 437 - SUPREME COURT] . Both sides have not brought on record regarding the outcome of the Larger Bench of the Supreme Court as on date. The matter needs to be re-considered on the basis of the outcome of the Larger Benc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... edit under Rule 15 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 read with Section 11AC of Central Excise Act, 1944.Therefore, the appellant filed the present appeal. 2. The appellant in grounds of appeal submitted that thePOY Division and DTY division both situated on the same factory premises. At material time the POY Division and DTY Division were considered and registered one factory even under the Factories Act. Both the divisions have a Common registration for the purpose of Sales Tax and Income tax Act and there is a single common balance sheet being prepared for the divisions. Both the divisions together constitute the single business entity of M/s Modern Petrofils. DTY Division is neither as sister concern nor as sister unit of POY Division. The ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to March 2008, revealed that appellant had not declared the manufacturing of electricity and steam and supply of electricity to the DTY Division and the residential colony. This itself proves that appellant have suppressed the facts and misstated the facts with clear intention to evade the Central Excise Duty. Therefore, an extended period is rightly invoked. 4. On careful consideration of the submissions made by both sides and perusal of the records, we find that the Revenue has denied the Cenvat Credit in respect of Furnace Oil used for generation of electricity on the ground that the part of electricity was used by the appellant s DTY division and part of the credit of ₹ 37,555/- was disallowed on the ground that the electricity ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
