Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 2, Cited by 62]

Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal

M/S. Ambuja Cement Eastern Ltd vs C.C.E., Raipur on 26 March, 2014

        

 
IN THE CUSTOMS, EXCISE & SERVICE TAX

APPELLATE TRIBUNAL

WEST BLOCK NO.2, R.K. PURAM, NEW DELHI  110 066



      Date of Hearing 26.03.2014



For Approval &Signature :



Honble Mrs. Archana Wadhwa, Member (Judicial)



1.
Whether Press Reporter may be allowed to see the Order for publication as per Rule 27 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982?
No
2.
Whether it would be released under Rule 27 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982 for publication in any authoritative report or not?
No 
3.
Whether Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the order?
Seen
4.
Whether order is to be circulated to the Department Authorities?
Yes




Appeal No. E/3134/2006 -EX[SM]

[Arising out of Order-in-Original No.Commissioner/RPR/69/2006,  dated 27.06.2006 passed by C.C.E.(Appeals), Raipur]





M/s. Ambuja Cement Eastern Ltd.			Appellants



Vs.



C.C.E., Raipur						Respondents

Appearance Shri Hemant Bajaj, Advocate - for the appellants Shri D Singh, DR - for the respondents CORAM: Honble Mrs. Archana Wadhwa, Member (Judicial) Final Order No.51295, dated 26.03.2014 Per Honble Mrs. Archana Wadhwa :

After hearing both the sides, I find that the dispute in the present appeal relates to availment of 50% CENVAT credit duty paid on capital goods in the next financial year. The lower authorities have denied the credit by following the Tribunals decision in the case of Parasrampuria Synthetics Vs. CCE, Jaipur [2004 (170)ELT 327 (Tri.-Del.)] laying down that the said balance credit cannot be availed without actually installing the capital goods and commissioning the plant.

2. However, I find that the said decision stands over-ruled by the Larger Bench of the Tribunal in the case of BPCL Vs. CCE, Mumbai [2012 (277) ELT 353 (Tri.-LB)]. It stands held by the Larger Bench that the credit of balance 50% of the amount of duty paid on capital goods can be availed in subsequent financial year without installing the said capital goods and putting them into use.

3. By following the said decision of the Larger Bench, I set aside the impugned order and allow the appeal with consequential relief to the appellants.

(Dictated and pronounced in the Open Court) (Archana Wadhwa) Member (Judicial) SSK -2-