Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:
TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
By Case ID:

When case Id is present, search is done only for this

Sort By:
RelevanceDefaultDate
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        -

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        <h1>Tribunal allows appeal on Cenvat credit for used capital goods sent to SEZ</h1> <h3>M/s Anabond Ltd. Versus CCE, Pondichery</h3> The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, holding that there was no requirement to reverse Cenvat credit on used capital goods cleared to their SEZ ... Demand of reversal of Cenvat Credit - Credit on the used capital goods cleared without payment of duty - SEZ Unit - Held that:- period involved in this case is October, 2005. The appellants cleared inputs and capital goods etc. by following the procedure laid down under Notification 58/2003. On identical issue the Tribunal in the case of M/s. Wabco TVS (India) Ltd. (2013 (2) TMI 165 - CESTAT CHENNAI) rejected the Revenue appeal and held that the clearance of goods to their own unit at SEZ in not required reversing the cenvat credit. Therefore, Tribunal's decision applies to the facts of the present case. Further, I find that as rightly contended by the appellant there is no specific recovery mechanism of credit on the inputs and capital goods cleared during the relevant period. The specific provision was introduced only w. e. f. 01. 02. 2013. This issue was specifically dealt by the Tribunal at Mumbai in the case of IspatMetallics Industries Ltd. (2005 (10) TMI 129 - CESTAT, MUMBAI). By following these Tribunal's decisions, I hold that the appellants are not liable to reverse Cenvat credit availed on the capital goods cleared to their own unit at SEZ. - Decided against assessee. Issues:1. Reversal of Cenvat Credit on used capital goods cleared without payment of duty to own unit at SEZ.2. Appellant's appeal against Commissioner (Appeals) order.3. Revenue's appeal against setting aside penalty by Commissioner (Appeals).Analysis:Issue 1: Reversal of Cenvat CreditThe dispute revolved around the demand for the reversal of Cenvat credit on used capital goods cleared without duty payment to the appellant's unit at SEZ. The adjudicating authority upheld the reversal of credit and imposed a penalty, which was later set aside by the Commissioner (Appeals). The appellant argued that the relevant period was October 2005 and relied on Circular F. No. 68/2003-Cus, stating that the credit availed on inputs and capital goods cleared to SEZ without reversal was permissible. The appellant also highlighted the absence of a recovery mechanism for credit during the period, which was introduced only in 2013. Citing case laws, including CCE Hyderabad Vs. Navodhaya Plastic Industries Ltd., the appellant contended that the credit disallowance without depreciation was unjust.Issue 2: Appellant's AppealThe appellant's counsel emphasized that the Tribunal's decision in the case of M/s. Wabco TVS (India) Ltd. supported their position that clearing goods to their SEZ unit did not necessitate the reversal of Cenvat credit. The absence of a specific recovery mechanism during the relevant period, as addressed in the case of IspatMetallics Industries Ltd., further strengthened the appellant's argument. Consequently, the Tribunal held in favor of the appellant, allowing their appeal and negating the need for penalty imposition.Issue 3: Revenue's AppealOn the other hand, the Revenue argued that SEZ and EOU should be treated equally, requiring an equal amount of credit to be reversed as per Rule 3(5) of CCR. Citing case laws such as CCE, Chennai-II Vs. Sundaram Brake Linings Ltd., the Revenue contended that the inputs purchased by the appellant and subsequently transferred to SEZ warranted credit reversal. However, the Tribunal's decision aligned with the appellant's stance, emphasizing the absence of a specific recovery mechanism during the relevant period and ruling in favor of the appellant.In conclusion, the Tribunal's judgment favored the appellant, highlighting the lack of a recovery mechanism for credit availed on capital goods cleared to their SEZ unit during the relevant period. The decision was supported by previous Tribunal rulings and case laws, leading to the allowance of the appellant's appeal and the rejection of the Revenue's appeal.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found