Just a moment...

Top
Help
AI Drafter - (New and Powerful)

TaxTMI AI Drafter workflow from input facts to final legal draft Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.

Try Now
×

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 / RSS

2018 (3) TMI 748

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....oner (AR) for the respondent The issue in this appeal against order-in-appeal no. CD/565/RGD/2015 dated 17th May 2015 of Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Mumbai Zone - II pertains to availment of CENVAT credit of duty paid on 'HR coils', 'MS beams', 'MS channels' and 'MS angles' as capital goods to the extent of Rs. 4,79,148/- between April 2006 and February 2010 which was disallowed b....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Central Excise is no longer good law owing to the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Commissioner of Central Excise, Jaipur v. Rajasthan Spinning & Weaving Mills Ltd [2010 (255) ELT 481 (SC)] and that the decision of the Tribunal in Sakthi Sugars Ltd v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Salem [2008 (227) ELT 107 (Tri.-Chennai)] is squarely applicable to the present dispute. It is submitted by....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he inputs had been used and which should have been examined by the lower authorities to invoke the bar of limitation on recovery. 4. Learned Authorised Representative reiterated the contents of the impugned order. 5. On a careful perusal of the impugned order and the adjudication proceedings, it is seen that the above two contentions of the appellant had not been taken into consideration bef....