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

TMI Blog

Home

2018 (8) TMI 1453

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ey availed the CENVAT credit of Central Excise Duty paid on tippers, compressors and other machineries of motor vehicles - demand hit by limitation. CENVAT Credit on tippers, compressors, etc - Held that:- Tribunal in the case of Ganta Ramanaiah Naidu [2009 (9) TMI 261 - CESTAT, BANGALORE] has specifically held that CENVAT credit on such motor vehicles is excluded from the benefit of CENVAT credit as capital goods - the view expressed by the Bench in the case of Ganta Ramaiah Naidu in identical set of facts for denial of CENVAT credit is a correct view - credit allowed. Demand of CENVAT credit on capital goods for the entire amount as being 100% of the duty paid - Held that:- The appellant had not availed the entire CENVAT credit of 1,96,33 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... r vehicles i.e., tippers under the understanding that they are eligible for such CENVAT credit as these tippers were used for rendering taxable output services. The lower authorities issued one show cause notice dated 13.03.2008 demanding the CENVAT credit availed during the period in question on these grounds. The appellant herein contested the show cause notice stating that since they are providing taxable output services they are entitled to take the CENVAT credit as the said vehicles i.e., tippers are used for movement of various materials during the course of rendering output services; the demand for a particular period April, 2006 to September, 2006 was contested on limitation. The adjudicating authority after considering the submissi .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... against availment of CENVAT credit and capital goods. He draws out attention to the show cause notice and submits that the demand of ₹ 1.96 crores is entire amount of 100% CENVAT credit on the capital goods, while appellant had availed only 50% credit, assuming that demand has to be raised on the appellant, it should be for this amount which is 50% of ₹ 1.96 crores. However, he submits that they are justified in availing such CENVAT credit, a submission totally unconsidered by the adjudicating authority in the impugned Order. He would submit that the penalties and the interest were by set aside. 4. Learned Departmental Representative relies upon the decision of the Tribunal on a similar set of facts, in the case of Ganta Ramana .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... d the CENVAT credit of Central Excise Duty paid on tippers, compressors and other machineries of motor vehicles. The demand of ₹ 1,83,35,538/- for the period April, 2006 to September, 2006 is set aside as hit by limitation. (ii) As regards the demands raised for the CENVAT credit of ₹ 3,28,80,899/- as ineligible CENVAT credit of the Central Excise Duty paid on tippers, compressors, etc, we find that the adjudicating authority was correct in confirming the demands so raised. The judgment of the Tribunal in the case of Ganta Ramanaiah Naidu (supra) (wherein one of us, M.V. Ravindran was a member) has specifically held that CENVAT credit on such motor vehicles is excluded from the benefit of CENVAT credit as capital goods. Learned .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... and also pass an appropriate adjudication order. 6. Another point which was raised by the Learned Counsel was regarding the demand of interest. It is his submission that the entire amount of ₹ 3.28 crores was unutilized and was lying in credit and hence, no interest should be demanded. We are not in agreement with the contentions raised by the Learned Counsel. We find that the interest liability arises on the amount confirmed and upheld by us i.e., to the tune of ₹ 3,28,80,899/- and reject the prayers of appellant on interest issue. 7. Since the entire issue involved in this case is regarding the interpretation of eligibility to avail CENVAT credit on the tippers which are used for rendering output services, we hold that appel .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates