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 denies Revenue's appeal on Cenvat credit & excise duty recovery, upholds penalties.</h1> <h3>COMMISSIONER OF C. EX., JAIPUR-II Versus JAIN MARMO INDUSTRIES LTD.</h3> COMMISSIONER OF C. EX., JAIPUR-II Versus JAIN MARMO INDUSTRIES LTD. - 2010 (251) E.L.T. 127 (Tri. - Del.) Issues:1. Disallowance and recovery of Cenvat credit under Rule 12 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002.2. Recovery of amount collected as central excise duty after a Supreme Court decision.3. Appropriation of amount debited by the respondents on exported goods.4. Disallowance of Cenvat credit and demand of interest.5. Imposition of penalty under Rule 15 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004.Issue 1: Disallowance and recovery of Cenvat credit under Rule 12 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002The case involved a show cause notice proposing disallowance and recovery of Cenvat credit amounting to Rs. 1,75,481 under Rule 12 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002, due to the cutting of marble blocks into slabs not being considered as manufacture post a Supreme Court decision. The original authority disallowed a portion of the credit and imposed a penalty under Rule 15 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. The Revenue challenged this decision.Issue 2: Recovery of amount collected as central excise duty after a Supreme Court decisionThe Revenue contended that the amount of Rs. 27,445 collected by the respondents from customers as central excise duty after a Supreme Court decision should be recovered in cash under Section 11D of the Central Excise Act, 1944, and not be appropriated in the Cenvat account. The Tribunal analyzed the provisions of Section 11D and relevant case laws to determine the liability for duty payment post the Supreme Court's decision.Issue 3: Appropriation of amount debited by the respondents on exported goodsThe original authority had appropriated the amount of Rs. 27,445 debited by the respondents on goods exported in the Government account. The Tribunal examined the appropriateness of this action in light of the legal provisions and factual circumstances of the case.Issue 4: Disallowance of Cenvat credit and demand of interestThe case also involved the disallowance of Cenvat credit and the demand of interest. The Tribunal reviewed the eligibility of Cenvat credit on capital goods and the lapse of credit balance based on the timing of goods receipt and production activities. Relevant Supreme Court decisions were cited to support the findings.Issue 5: Imposition of penalty under Rule 15 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004The imposition of a penalty under Rule 15 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, was a point of contention. The Tribunal considered the grounds of appeal raised by the Revenue and the arguments presented by both sides before making a decision based on the legal provisions and precedents cited during the proceedings.In conclusion, the Tribunal rejected the Revenue's appeal after a thorough analysis of the issues, legal provisions, and relevant case laws. The decision was based on the interpretation of Section 11D of the Central Excise Act, 1944, and the application of principles established in previous judgments by the Supreme Court and other tribunals.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
