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 Overturns Order, Directs Reassessment of ISO Tank Input Status; Fresh Decision Required Within One Month.</h1> <h3>Aarti Industries Ltd Versus Commissioner of C.E. & S.T. -Surat-i</h3> Aarti Industries Ltd Versus Commissioner of C.E. & S.T. -Surat-i - TMI Issues:Whether the appellant is entitled to Cenvat Credit on ISO Tank used for packing and transportation of the final product.Analysis:The issue in this case revolves around the entitlement of the appellant to claim Cenvat Credit on an ISO Tank used for packing and transporting the final product. The appellant initially availed the credit under the 'Capital Goods' category but later realized it should have been claimed as 'inputs.' The adjudicating authority denied the credit, stating that the ISO tank does not qualify as capital goods. The appellant argued that as per various board circulars, they are entitled to the credit if the value of durable packaging material is included in the assessable value of the final product. They also cited several judgments and circulars to support their claim.The Tribunal found that the adjudicating authority erred in denying the credit solely based on the appellant's initial classification of the ISO tank as capital goods. The Tribunal opined that if the ISO tank qualifies as an input, the credit should be allowed, regardless of the initial classification. The failure of the adjudicating authority to consider whether the ISO tank falls under the category of inputs amounted to a violation of principles of Natural Justice. The Tribunal held that the impugned order was not legal and proper due to this oversight.Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order and remanded the matter to the adjudicating authority for a fresh decision. The adjudicating authority was directed to re-examine the issue, considering the ISO Tank as an input this time. The Commissioner was instructed to take into account all relevant circulars and judgments cited by the appellant. The appellant was granted a fair opportunity to present their case, and the adjudicating authority was mandated to issue a fresh order within one month from the date of the Tribunal's order. The appeal was allowed by way of remand to the adjudicating authority for further proceedings.
TaxTMI 