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.
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 / NCLT & Others
  • 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
In Favour Of: New
---- In Favour Of ----
  • ---- In Favour Of ----
  • Assessee
  • In favour of Assessee
  • Partly in favour of Assessee
  • Revenue
  • In favour of Revenue
  • Partly in favour of Revenue
  • Appellant / Petitioner
  • In favour of Appellant
  • In favour of Petitioner
  • In favour of Respondent
  • Partly in favour of Appellant
  • Partly in favour of Petitioner
  • Others
  • Neutral (alternate remedy)
  • Neutral (Others)
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
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court.
Eg: Madhya Pradesh, Orissa, Hyderabad

Use comma for multiple locations.

AY/FY: New?
Enter only the year or year range (e.g., 2025, 2025–26, or 2025–2026).
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:

---------------- For section wise search only -----------------


Statute Type: ?
This filter alone wont work. 1st select a law > statute > section from below filter
New
---- All Statutes----
  • ---- All Statutes ----
  • Select the law first, to see the statutes list
Sections: ?
Select a statute to see the list of sections here
New
---- All Sections ----
  • ---- All Sections ----
  • Select the statute first, to see the sections list

Accuracy Level ~ 90%



TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2026
  • 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
Sort By: ?
In Sort By 'Default', exact matches for text search are shown at the top, followed by the remaining results in their regular order.
RelevanceDefaultDate
TMI Citation
    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

        whatsappJoin Channel
        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :
        Central Excise

        2020 (7) TMI 698 - AT - Central Excise

        📋
        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

        Tribunal overturns penalties, rules in favor of appellant complying with Cenvat Credit Rules The Tribunal set aside the Commissioner's order, ruling that the appellant validly complied with Rule 6(3)(ii) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. The ...
                      Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.

                          Tribunal overturns penalties, rules in favor of appellant complying with Cenvat Credit Rules

                          The Tribunal set aside the Commissioner's order, ruling that the appellant validly complied with Rule 6(3)(ii) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. The demand and penalties imposed under Rule 6(3)(i) were deemed unsustainable as the appellant correctly opted for Rule 6(3)(ii). The appeal was allowed, and the penalties were overturned.




                          Issues Involved:
                          1. Compliance with Rule 6(3) and Rule 6(3A) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004.
                          2. Validity of the appellant's exercise of the option under Rule 6(3)(ii).
                          3. Applicability and interpretation of Explanation-I of Rule 6(3).
                          4. Procedural requirements for exercising options under Rule 6(3).
                          5. Demand and penalties imposed under Rule 6(3)(i) and Rule 14 of the Cenvat Credit Rules.

                          Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

                          1. Compliance with Rule 6(3) and Rule 6(3A) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004:
                          The appellant contended that they complied with Rule 6(3) by making reversals of cenvat credit in terms of Rule 6(3)(ii) read with Rule 6(3A). The Tribunal found that the appellant had indeed followed the required procedure and conditions laid down in Rule 6(3A), including providing the necessary intimation to the Range Superintendent. The Tribunal referenced previous decisions (Mercedes Benz India (P) Ltd. and Aster Pvt. Ltd.) to support the view that procedural lapses in intimation do not negate the substantive compliance with Rule 6(3)(ii).

                          2. Validity of the appellant's exercise of the option under Rule 6(3)(ii):
                          The appellant exercised the option under Rule 6(3)(ii) by a letter dated May 29, 2008, and made payments accordingly. The Tribunal held that the appellant's action of paying 10% for April 2008 was due to the time required to understand the new provisions and not an exercise of the option under Rule 6(3)(i). The Tribunal emphasized that exercising an option is a positive act and cannot be inferred merely from actions taken in compliance with previous rules.

                          3. Applicability and interpretation of Explanation-I of Rule 6(3):
                          Explanation-I of Rule 6(3) states that once an option is exercised, it must be continued for the rest of the financial year. The Tribunal found that the appellant had not exercised the option under Rule 6(3)(i) and thus was not barred from opting for Rule 6(3)(ii). The Tribunal cited the Larger Bench decision in Ankit Packaging Ltd., which supported the view that initial payments under previous rules do not constitute an irrevocable exercise of an option.

                          4. Procedural requirements for exercising options under Rule 6(3):
                          The Tribunal noted that Rule 6(3A) requires intimation to the jurisdictional Central Excise authority when exercising the option under Rule 6(3)(ii). The Tribunal found that the appellant had provided the necessary intimation and particulars, fulfilling the procedural requirements. The Tribunal referenced decisions in Mercedes Benz India (P) Ltd. and Aster Pvt. Ltd., which held that procedural lapses in intimation do not invalidate the exercise of the option under Rule 6(3)(ii).

                          5. Demand and penalties imposed under Rule 6(3)(i) and Rule 14 of the Cenvat Credit Rules:
                          The Commissioner had confirmed a demand of Rs. 4,35,71,478/- and imposed penalties, alleging that the appellant had exercised the option under Rule 6(3)(i). The Tribunal held that the demand and penalties were unsustainable as the appellant had validly exercised the option under Rule 6(3)(ii). The Tribunal referenced the Telengana High Court's decision in Tiara Advertising and the Tribunal's decision in Reliance Life Insurance Co. Ltd., which held that the Revenue cannot choose an option on behalf of the assessee.

                          Conclusion:
                          The Tribunal set aside the impugned order dated September 29, 2010, passed by the Commissioner, concluding that the appellant had complied with the relevant provisions and legally availed the option under Rule 6(3)(ii). The demand and penalties imposed were found to be contrary to law and were thus set aside. The appeal was allowed with consequential relief.
                          Full Summary is available for active users!
                          Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.

                          Topics

                          ActsIncome Tax
                          No Records Found