1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule β now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available


2. New: βIn Favour Ofβ filter added in Case Laws.
Try both these filters in Case Laws β
Just a moment...
1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule β now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available


2. New: βIn Favour Ofβ filter added in Case Laws.
Try both these filters in Case Laws β
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
<h1>Disallowance of Double Availment under CENVAT Scheme: Upheld Authority Decision</h1> The court upheld the decisions of the original authority and the Commissioner (Appeals) in dismissing the appeals due to the appellants' attempt to claim ... Cenvat/Modvat - Deemed credit on textiles Issues:1. Interpretation of CENVAT Scheme post 1-4-2003.2. Claim of deemed credit on inputs for semi-finished goods.3. Question of double availment of credit by the appellants.Analysis:1. The judgment deals with the transition of textiles under the CENVAT Scheme from 1-4-2003, replacing the earlier abatement system for duties on inputs. Notification No. 25/2003-C.Ex (N.T.) was issued, allowing credit for raw materials, semi-finished goods, and finished goods as of 31-3-2003/1-4-2003, subject to specific procedures and document verification.2. The appellants claimed deemed credit on inputs for semi-finished goods on the crucial cut-out date. However, it was found that suppliers had already availed credit on these inputs before supplying semi-finished goods to the appellants. The Commissioner's findings emphasized that multiple credits on the same inputs cannot be allowed, as it would lead to double availment, which is against legislative intent.3. The judgment upholds the decisions of the original authority and the Commissioner (Appeals) that the appellants attempted to claim a benefit for the second time by seeking deemed credit on inputs already credited by suppliers. The court deemed this attempt unjustified and not permissible under the law, leading to the dismissal of the appeals without interference.In conclusion, the judgment clarifies the inadmissibility of double availment of credit under the CENVAT Scheme and emphasizes adherence to the prescribed procedures and regulations to prevent unjust enrichment through multiple claims on the same set of inputs.