News Update

Income tax hands over Rs 1700 Cr tax demand to Congress PartyGST - Neither SCN nor the order spell out the reasons for retrospective cancellation of registration, hence cannot be sustained: HCStage-2 of Vikram-1 orbital rocket successfully test-firedGST - Non-application of mind - If reply was unsatisfactory, details could have been sought - Record does not reflect that such exercise was done - Matter remitted: HCHouthis claim UK has not capability to intercept their hypersonic missilesGST - Merely because a taxpayer has not filed returns for some period does not mean that registration is required to be cancelled with retrospective date also covering the period when returns were filed and taxpayer was compliant: HCIsraeli forces kill 200 Palestinians at Gaza medical complex & arrest over 1000GST - Petitioner's reply, although terse, is not taken into account while passing assessment orders - Petitioner put on terms, another opportunity provided: HCUnveil One Nation; One Debt Code; One Compliance Rule for Centre & StatesChina moves WTO against US tax subsidies for EVs & renewable energyMore on non-doms - The UK Spring Budget 2024 (See TII Edit)Notorious history-sheeter Mukhtar Ansari succumbs to cardiac arrest in UP jailTraining Program for Cambodian civil servants commences at MussoorieNY imposes USD 15 congestion taxCBIC revises tariff value of edible oils, gold & silver45 killed as bus races into ravine in South AfricaCBIC directs all Customs offices to remain open on Saturday & SundayBankman-Fried jailed for 25 yrs in FTX scamI-T- Once the citizen deposits the tax upon coming to know of his liability, it cannot be said that he has deliberately or willfully evaded the depositing of tax and interest in terms of Section 234A can be waived: HCHouthis attack continues in Red Sea; US military shoots down 4 dronesFederal Govt hands out USD 60 mn to rebuild collapsed bridge in BaltimoreI-T - Receipts of sale of scrap being part & parcel of activity and being proximate thereto would also be within ambit of gains derived from industrial undertaking for purpose of computing deduction u/s 80-IB: HCCanadian School Boards sue social media titans for 4 bn Canadian dollar in damagesFormer IPS officer Sanjiv Bhatt jailed for 20 yrs for planting drugs to frame lawyerCus - No Cess is payable when Basic Customs Duty is found to be Nil: CESTAT
 
CX - CENVAT Credit on inputs rejected by assembly line during manufacturing process cannot be denied: CESTAT

By TIOL News Service

KOLKATA, NOV 30, 2015: ALLEGING that the appellant had availed inadmissible CENVAT credit, the CCE, Jamshedpur confirmed demands of Rs.8,65,408/- &Rs.1,08,88,453/- along with interest and penalties.

In appeal before the CESTAT, the appellant submitted that out of total demand of Rs.1,17,53,861/- an amount of Rs.8,65,408/- is demanded for the inputs found short during physical verification of stock which was reversed by the appellant, along with interest of Rs.2,76,476/- before the issue of SCN. And that the remaining credit of Rs.1,08,88,453/- is denied by the Adjudicating authority on the ground that certain inputs are scrapped during the manufacturing process and that the same are not used in or in relation to the manufacture of the finished goods.

The appellant submitted that they follow an internal audit procedure by which if inputs are found defective at the time of receipt or during quality check then such inputs are sent back to the vendors and equivalent credit taken is also reversed; that inputs after passing audit test are sent to the online assembly; that during online assembly of finished goods some of the parts/inputs are not picked up by the assembly line or get damaged; that the same has to be considered as scrap generated during the course of manufacture; that such inputs are cut into pieces & sold as scrap on payment of appropriate amount of Central Excise duty. It is further mentioned that such waste comes to only 0.28% to 0.49% of the total value of the inputs/parts.

Reliance is placed on the following decisions in support viz. Asahi India Safety Glass Ltd. 2004-TIOL-29-HC-DEL-CX affirmed 2015-TIOL-129-SC-CX; Geltec Ltd. 2011-TIOL-968-HC-KAR-CX; Monika Electronics Ltd. 2006-TIOL-1296-CESTAT-DEL & CBEC Circular F.No.B-4/7/200-TRUdt.03.04.2000.

The AR justified the order of the adjudicating authority.

Noting that the decision in Asahi India Safety Glass Ltd. (supra) cited by the appellant is relevant and is squarely applicable to the facts of the present appeal, the Bench observed that as held in the case of Monika Electronics Ltd. (supra) , CENVAT Credit on the inputs rejected on line, in the manufacturing process, cannot be denied.

The argument of the appellant that demand of Rs.1,08,88,453/- is time barred as they filed Rule-173B declaration of the waste & scrap of components and also included the same in their monthly returns filed with the department was accepted by the Bench and it is held that extended period of 5 years cannot be invoked with respect to demand of Rs.1,08,88,453/-.

The appeal filed by the appellant with respect to confirmation of demand of Rs.1,08,88,453/- was allowed on merits as well as on time bar.

In the matter of the demand of Rs.8,65,408/- being the CENVAT credit involved in inputs found short during stock taking, the Bench observed that this shortage was as a result of verification undertaken by the Audit of the appellant much before the same was detected by the Revenue and although the Appellant was aware of such shortages but still did not reverse the credit on these shortages and, therefore, the extended period will be applicable. Nonetheless, the Bench noted that the option of 25% reduced penalty u/s 11AC of CEA, 1944 was not extended to the appellant by the Adjudicating authority although the demand was paid by appellant along with interest before issue of SCN. The Tribunal extended the benefit of reduced penalty subject to the appellant paying 25% reduced penalty within 30 days from the receipt of the order. Consequently, since the penalty under Section 11ACwas upheld the other penalty of Rs.5,00,000/- imposed upon the appellant was set aside.

The appeal was partly allowed.

(See 2015-TIOL-2540-CESTAT-KOL)


POST YOUR COMMENTS
   

AR not Afar by SK Rahman

TIOL Tube Latest

Shri Shailendra Kumar, Trustee, TIOL Trust, giving welcome speech at TIOL Awards 2023




Shri M C Joshi, Former Chairman, CBDT




Address by Shri Buggana Rajendranath, Hon'ble Finance Minister of Andhra Pradesh at TIOL Awards 2023