TaxTMI Login
AI Drafter - (New and Powerful) ✕
Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Just a moment...
AI Drafter - (New and Powerful) ✕ Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: (i) Whether CENVAT credit on Naphtha and Furnace Oil used for generation of electricity that was wheeled outside the factory was admissible. (ii) Whether penalty was sustainable in the facts of the case.
Issue (i): Whether CENVAT credit on Naphtha and Furnace Oil used for generation of electricity that was wheeled outside the factory was admissible.
Analysis: The dispute was treated as covered by the earlier view that credit is not admissible on the quantity of Naphtha used for generation of electricity wheeled outside the factory. The Tribunal found no reason to depart from its earlier decision and did not accept the attempt to extend the ratio relating to by-products and technological necessity so as to permit credit on the electricity so exported.
Conclusion: The credit was held inadmissible.
Issue (ii): Whether penalty was sustainable in the facts of the case.
Analysis: The Tribunal followed the earlier view that, although credit was denied, the existence of conflicting views on the issue made penalty unjustified. The prior order was relied upon to hold that penalty should be deleted.
Conclusion: The penalty was set aside.
Final Conclusion: The denial of credit was maintained, but the penalty was removed, resulting in partial relief to the assessee.
Ratio Decidendi: Credit is not admissible on inputs used for generating electricity that is wheeled outside the factory, but penalty is not justified where the issue has been the subject of conflicting views.
TaxTMI 
