TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (4) TMI 1046
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....inery to M/s.OPC Asset Solutions Private Limited on 22.03.2013. The said capital goods were leased back to the petitioner with effect from 01.04.2013. According the petitioner, the goods were sold to OPC Limited only for financial accommodation and in view of the contemporaneous leasing back through rental agreement, there was no removal of capital goods from the factory premises of the petitioner and that therefore Rule 3(5) of the Cenvat Credit Rules is not attracted. 2.However, the respondent herein after scrutinizing the annual report of the assessee for the year 2012-13 during audit accounts conducted by the officers attached to Internal Audit of Madurai Commissionarate during Feb 2014 noted that deemed removal/delivery of the said ca....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....titioner herein. 3.The whole basis of the show cause notice as well as the impugned order is unsustainable in law. 6.Per contra, the learned standing counsel appearing for the respondents reiterated the stand taken in the counter affidavit. 7.At the very outset, this Court must notice the prayer made in the writ petition. The petitioner seeks quashing of the impugned order on the ground of non consideration of the submissions made by them in the reply and during personal hearing. Therefore, all that the petitioner seeks is only a remand to the file of the respondent for fresh consideration in accordance with law. Since this is the prayer sought for the by the petitioner himself, this Court would not be justified in venturing into a disc....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....such from the factory or premises of the provider of output service, the manufacturer of the final products or provider of output service, shall be liable to pay an amount equal to the credit availed in respect of such inputs or capital goods. 17.In this case, we find there is no removal of goods under cover of invoice as provided under Rule 9 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 and there is nothing in Rule 3 (5) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 to invoke the deeming fiction as insisted by the adjudicating authority. The language of Rule 3 (5) is plain and simple. When the inputs or capital goods on which cenvat credit has been taken are removed as such from the factory, then subject to compliance of other requirements, the credit availed i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ant contention raised by the disputant. This alone will ensure that decision-making occurs thoroughly and lawfully and that the decision-maker's mind is focussed. The decision-maker needs to be disciplined in addressing questions, nor just arriving at answers (Administrative Law by Mark Elliott and Jason N.E.Varuhas ? Fifth Edition.) 12.The learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner would also refer to the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court reported in 1983 (13) E.L.T 1342 (S.C) (East India Commercial Co. Ltd., Calcutta V. Collector of Customs, Calcutta). The Hon'ble Supreme Court held that the law declared by the highest Court in the State is binding on authorities or tribunals under its superintendence and that they cannot ....