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
TMI Blog
Home / TMI Blogs / RSS

2010 (4) TMI 486

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....02 are in subsequent years. "(a) The respondent received generators (which were originally imported by M/s. DLF Industries limited, Faridabad) in their factory by way of purchase. (b) The generator was received on 20-10-1998. During the period, there was an overall ceiling of credit of duty available to capital goods being restricted to 75% of total duty paid. In other words, if the generator was installed in 1998, only 75% of the total duty paid was available as Cenvat credit. (c) The installation took place in April 2000 by which time the ceiling of 75% of the credit was removed. (d) The respondent availed 50% of the total duty paid by them during the year 2000-2001 on the ground that the installation took place after 1-4-2000....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the appellant - Revenue to point out the aforesaid points to the Tribunal and seek appropriate rectification of order". After obtaining this order, Revenue has filed an application for rectification of mistake and also an application for condonation of delay in filing the application for rectification of mistake. 3. Heard both the sides. 4. In this case the decision of the Tribunal was rendered after taking note of the fact that in respect of another similar instance earlier, the matter was decided in favour of the assessee by the Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat. It was also noted by the Tribunal that Department had filed SLP before the Hon'ble Supreme Court. But unfortunately neither party nor the Department brought to the notice that....