TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>High Court Modifies Tribunal Order, Requires 50% Deposit Within Specified Period</h1> <h3>LALLY AUTOMOBILES PVT LTD Versus COMMISSIONER (ADJUDICATION), CENTRAL EXCISE</h3> LALLY AUTOMOBILES PVT LTD Versus COMMISSIONER (ADJUDICATION), CENTRAL EXCISE - 2014 (35) S.T.R. 26 (Del.) Issues:1. Interpretation of Cenvat credit rules regarding disallowance of credit for exempted services.2. Applicability of clarificatory amendment in Rule 2(e) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004.3. Whether the appellant should deposit entire Cenvat credit disallowed with interest as a pre-condition for hearing the appeal.4. Consideration of extended period of limitation by the tribunal.5. Calculation of Cenvat credit disallowed and recoverable amount.6. Fairness and equity in determining the amount to be deposited by the appellant.Analysis:1. The High Court considered the interpretation of Cenvat credit rules concerning the disallowance of credit for exempted services. The tribunal directed the appellant to deposit the entire Cenvat credit disallowed along with interest as a pre-condition for hearing the appeal.2. The court examined the applicability of a clarificatory amendment in Rule 2(e) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. The appellant argued that the amendment was being wrongly interpreted as clarificatory and retrospective. The court noted conflicting judgments of the tribunal on this matter.3. The tribunal's order highlighted a clarificatory amendment stating that Cenvat credit for exempted services cannot be set off from the service tax liability. The appellant contended that the rented premises were not exclusively used for selling vehicles but also for taxable services like vehicle servicing and repairs.4. The court addressed the issue of the extended period of limitation, which was not considered when directing the deposit of the entire Cenvat credit and interest payable. The appellant raised concerns about the Revenue's entitlement to invoke the extended period of limitation.5. Detailed calculations of the Cenvat credit disallowed and recoverable amount were presented, emphasizing the need to determine the fairness and equity in the amount to be deposited by the appellant. The court reviewed the findings of the adjudicating authority regarding the disallowance of Cenvat credit.6. In light of the arguments and considerations, the High Court modified the impugned order, directing the appellant to deposit 50% of the demand without interest within a specified period. The court aimed to address the fairness and equity in determining the amount to be deposited by the appellant, ultimately disposing of the appeal and application for stay without costs.
TaxTMI 