Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 3 of 3 (0.19 seconds)
Precision Equipment (Chennai) Private ... vs Commissioner Of Central Excise on 18 November, 2016 cites

M/S. Pricol Ltd vs Cce, Coimbatore on 5 January, 2015

4. Heard both sides. It is seen that definition of input service distributor in rule 2 (m) also encompasses either office of the manufacturer of final products or provider of output service for the purpose of distributing credit of service tax paid. In the instant case, no doubt, there is no ISD has been registered by appellant. It has been held in a number of decisions and also by this Bench that not having a ISD registration in respect of credit availed and distributed such credit otherwise eligible is curable defect, for example, Final Order No.40881 to 40883/2016 dt. 3.6.2016 in the case of Murugappa Morgan Thermal Ceramics Ltd. Vs CCE Chennai-III which had followed earlier Tribunal's decision in the case of Pricol Ltd. Vs CCE Coimbatore - 2015 (38) STR 668 (Che.). This being the case and also taking into account the ratio of the Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court judgement in the case of National Engineering Industries cited by learned counsel, I find that appellant has not taken double credit which has been also simultaneously availed by other unit and in any case it relates to very much to their own company. In the event appeal is allowed.
Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal Cites 2 - Cited by 7 - Full Document

C.C.E., Jaipur I vs National Engineering Industries on 15 November, 2016

2. Today when the matter came up for hearing, on behalf of appellant, learned counsel, Shri J. Shankarraman submitted that there could be a lapse in respect of non-taking of input service distribution registration. However, the fact remains that credits were attributable only to units of their own company and not of somebody else. It is also not the case that double or parallel credit had been taken by Unit-II. He also points out that requirement of prorate distribution of credit by ISD in respect of credits attributable to more than one manufacturing unit came into force in Rule 7 of the CCR 2004 only w.e.f. 1.7.2012. He drew attention to ratio of the judgement of the Honble Rajasthan in CCE Jaipur Vs National Engineering Industries Ltd.  2016 (42) STR 945 (Raj.) where the similar objection of the department that credit from one unit was used for the purpose of duty liability of other unit without prorata distribution will not survive in view of such restriction not prevailing prior to 1.7.2012.
Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal Cites 0 - Cited by 2 - Full Document

M/S. Murugappa Morgan Thermal Ceramics ... vs Cce, Chennai Iii on 9 November, 2016

4. Heard both sides. It is seen that definition of input service distributor in rule 2 (m) also encompasses either office of the manufacturer of final products or provider of output service for the purpose of distributing credit of service tax paid. In the instant case, no doubt, there is no ISD has been registered by appellant. It has been held in a number of decisions and also by this Bench that not having a ISD registration in respect of credit availed and distributed such credit otherwise eligible is curable defect, for example, Final Order No.40881 to 40883/2016 dt. 3.6.2016 in the case of Murugappa Morgan Thermal Ceramics Ltd. Vs CCE Chennai-III which had followed earlier Tribunal's decision in the case of Pricol Ltd. Vs CCE Coimbatore - 2015 (38) STR 668 (Che.). This being the case and also taking into account the ratio of the Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court judgement in the case of National Engineering Industries cited by learned counsel, I find that appellant has not taken double credit which has been also simultaneously availed by other unit and in any case it relates to very much to their own company. In the event appeal is allowed.
Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal Cites 0 - Cited by 2 - Full Document
1