Just a moment...
Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- 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.
Issues: Whether Cenvat credit on furnace oil used for generation of electricity was admissible to the extent electricity was supplied to a separately registered plastic division situated in the same compound, and whether such division could be treated as part of the same factory.
Analysis: The governing principle applied was that credit is available on inputs used for generation of electricity only to the extent the electricity is used within the factory of production for manufacture or other permitted use. The appellant's plastic division had been separately registered under the Central Excise regime as a distinct place of business. Separate registration under the applicable rules required separate licensing for separate places of business, and the appellant could not, after obtaining such registration, contend that the plastic division was nonetheless the same factory merely because it stood within a common boundary wall. The definition of factory in the Act did not override the legal effect of separate registration in the facts of the case.
Conclusion: Cenvat credit was not admissible to the extent electricity was supplied to the separately registered plastic division, and the assessee's claim for refund/re-credit failed.