TaxTMI Login
🎉 Festive Offer: Flat 15% off on all plans! →⚡ Don’t Miss Out: Limited-Time Offer →
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>Punjab & Haryana HC on Input Credit & Penalties under Central Excise Act</h1> <h3>The Commissioner of Central Excise Versus M/s Maruti Udyog Ltd.</h3> The Punjab & Haryana High Court addressed issues concerning the extent of credit on inputs from Export-Oriented Undertakings and the imposition of ... 100% EOU Unit - Rate of Duty – CVD – held that - the question of rate of duty would be involved and appeal, if any, would be competent before Hon'ble the Supreme Court in view of the provisions of Section 35-G of the Act. Issues:1. Extent of credit on inputs from 100% Export-Oriented Undertaking2. Imposition of penalty under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944Extent of credit on inputs from 100% Export-Oriented Undertaking:The judgment involved questions regarding the allowance of credit on inputs procured from a 100% Export-Oriented Undertaking during a specific period. The main issue was whether the credit allowed exceeded the Countervailing Duty (CVD) paid on those inputs. The Revenue raised concerns about the extent of credit permissible under the law. Reference was made to a similar case decided by a larger Bench of CEGAT, which was later taken to the Bombay High Court. The Bombay High Court concluded that the matter involved the rate of duty, making it competent for appeal before the Supreme Court. The judgment highlighted the necessity of determining the correct rate of duty in such cases, as per the provisions of Section 35-G of the Central Excise Act, 1944.Imposition of penalty under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944:Another significant issue addressed in the judgment was whether a penalty equal to the determined duty could be imposed under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944 in cases related to the procurement of inputs from Export-Oriented Undertakings. The judgment referred to the proceedings in the Bombay High Court and emphasized the importance of understanding the legal provisions concerning the imposition of penalties in such scenarios. The parties involved in the case jointly acknowledged that the question of the rate of duty was crucial, indicating the possibility of appealing before the Supreme Court based on the provisions of Section 35-G of the Act. The judgment ultimately granted the Revenue the liberty to file an appeal before the Supreme Court for further deliberation on the matter.In conclusion, the judgment by the Punjab & Haryana High Court addressed complex issues surrounding the extent of credit on inputs from Export-Oriented Undertakings and the imposition of penalties under the Central Excise Act, 1944. The decision highlighted the legal intricacies involved in determining the permissible credit limits and the considerations for imposing penalties in such cases. The reference to the Bombay High Court's decision and the provisions of the Act underscored the significance of understanding and applying the relevant legal frameworks in resolving disputes related to central excise matters.
TaxTMI 
