2017 (8) TMI 1380

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Shri MK Mall, Assistant Commissioner (AR) for respondent ORDER Appellant, M/s Deepak Fertilizers & Petrochemicals Corporation Ltd, was subjected to recovery of CENVAT credit of Rs. 12,95,749 alleged to have been wrongly availed and imposed with penalty of like amount under the rule 15 of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 read with section 11AC of Central Excise Act, 1944. Commissioner of Central ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e was no scope for liability for tax on non-existent servicing charge and, therefore, entitlement of the appellant for CENVAT credit did not, under rule 3 of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004, arise. It was also held that the appellant was unable to discharge its obligation to submit evidence of eligibility for  credit as mandated in the rule 9 of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. The impugned order, in add....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....tum of duty already determined by the jurisdictional offices of the supplier unit cannot be contested  or challenged by the officers in charge of the recipient unit. 4.  Reliance was also placed on the decision of the Tribunal in Jollyboard Ltd v. Commissioner of Customs & Central Excise, Aurangabad [2013 (32) STR 337 (Tri-Mumbai)] which held that '5.1 There is no dispute about....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....tation charges to the appellant is not sustainable in law.'  5.  It is not in dispute that CENVAT credit had been availed on the tax paid on the servicing charge as invoiced originally. It is also not in dispute that the credit note acknowledging reduction of the servicing charge did not include the tax paid on such charge. The credit was sought to be denied only on the ground that su....