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>Tribunal Allows Appeal Due to Time-Barred Show Cause Notice</h1> <h3>M/s. Hindustan Unilever Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Central Excise & Service Tax, Kanpur</h3> The Tribunal allowed the appeal in a case where Cenvat Credit disallowance was based on invoices issued in the name of a different unit, considering it a ... CENVAT credit - Unit-I had taken credit on the basis of the invoices of the suppliers which were issued in the name of their Unit-II - It appeared to Revenue that Unit-I and Unit-II are different taxable entities and as such the taking of such credit was objected to by the Revenue - extended period of limitation - Held that: - only dispute is regarding the mentioning of the Unit-I or Unit-II on the invoice and that taking of credit by the other unit. Such error appears to be by way of clerical error calling for no adverse inference. The SCN issued admittedly after more than 12(twelve) months invoking extended period of limitation is time barred as the conditions prescribed for invoking extended period are not available in this case. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. Issues:1. Disallowance of Cenvat Credit based on invoices issued in the name of a different unit.2. Time limitation for invoking extended period in the show cause notice.Analysis:1. The case involved a dispute where Unit-I of a company had taken credit based on invoices issued in the name of Unit-II. The Revenue objected to this, considering both units as separate taxable entities. The appellant reversed the credit upon objection but faced a show cause notice proposing disallowance of the credit, along with interest and penalty. The Order-in-Original confirmed the demand and penalty. The Tribunal noted that there was no dispute regarding the duty-paid inputs received, with the issue being the unit mentioned on the invoices and the credit taken by the other unit. The Tribunal considered this a clerical error and held that the show cause notice, issued after 12 months invoking extended period, was time-barred as the conditions for invoking the extended period were not met. Consequently, the appeal was allowed, and the impugned order was set aside, granting the appellants any consequential relief as per the law.2. The Tribunal observed that the show cause notice, issued more than 12 months after the objection by the Central Excise authority, invoked the extended period of limitation. However, the Tribunal found that the conditions required for invoking the extended period were not present in this case. As a result, the Tribunal held that the show cause notice was time-barred due to the absence of the necessary conditions for extending the limitation period. Therefore, the appeal was allowed on this ground, setting aside the impugned order and entitling the appellants to any consequential relief as per the law.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
