Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2015 (10) TMI AT This

  • Login
  • Cases Cited
  • Referred In
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2015 (10) TMI 1545 - AT - Central Excise


Issues:
- Availment of Cenvat credit on capital goods
- Interpretation of Rule 4(2)(b) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002

Analysis:
1. The appeal challenged an Order-in-Appeal that upheld an order-in-original regarding the appellant's availing of 50% Cenvat credit on C.I. Moulds. The appellant took the remaining 50% credit in a subsequent financial year, but the moulds became defective and were cleared as waste. The Revenue contended that as per Rule 4(2)(b) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002, the balance of credit can only be taken when the capital goods remain in possession and use. A show cause notice led to a demand for credit amounting to Rs. 1,57,008/-, a penalty of Rs. 20,000/-, and interest under relevant rules.

2. Despite the absence of the appellant during the hearing, the matter was considered for disposal on merit.

3. The Revenue reiterated that the appellant was not entitled to the balance 50% credit as the moulds were not in possession or use, citing a Board Circular and previous tribunal judgments. The appellant's lack of possession and use of the moulds rendered them ineligible for the remaining credit.

4. The Tribunal, after reviewing the submissions and records, concluded that the appellant had availed 50% credit initially but was not entitled to the remaining 50% credit as the moulds were not in possession or use during the subsequent financial year. Rule 4(2)(b) stipulates that the balance credit can only be taken if the capital goods are in possession and use, which was not the case here. Citing previous judgments and the Board's clarification, the Tribunal upheld the impugned order, dismissing the appellant's appeal.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates