Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 12 (0.65 seconds)Cce, Delhi-Iii vs M/S.Maruti Udyog Ltd on 17 May, 2016
11. Further in CCE, Delhi vs. Maruti Udyog Limited [2007 (214)
E.L.T. 173 (P & H)], the Hon'ble High Court upheld the findings of the
Tribunal that the assessee was not liable to pay interest as the credit
was only taken as an entry in the Modvat record and was not in fact
utilised. The Tribunal held that in absence of utilisation of credit, the
assessee was not liable to pay interest. The relevant para of the
decision is quoted below:-
Commissioner Of Central Excise, Delhi vs Maruti Udyog Ltd on 27 February, 2002
12. The above decision of the Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court
has been upheld by the Hon'ble Supreme Court as reported in
Commissioner v. Maruti Udyog Ltd. - 2007 (214) E.L.T. A50 (S.C.)
Cce, Ghaziabad vs M/S. Ashoka Metal Dicor (P) Ltd on 8 September, 2009
13. Further, in CCE, Ghaziabad vs. Ashoka Metal Decor (P) Ltd.[2011
(21) S.T.R. 469 (All.)] the Hon'ble High Court held that when the
wrong credit is not utilized for payment of final output duty on final
products, neither the assessee gets any advantage nor there is any
Revenue loss to the Government.
Cce, Gurgaon vs M/S Maruti Udyog Ltd on 30 July, 2014
The Hon'ble High Court followed the
legal principles upheld by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in CCE vs. Maruti
Udyog Ltd (Supra). "..Such amount credited in the Cenvat account was
available for the payment of duty but the same was not utilized for
payment of duty and subsequently, the Assessee has reversed the
Cenvat Credit entry in the Cenvat account.
The Commissioner Of Central Excise ... vs Bombay Dyeing And Manufacturing Co. Ltd on 14 June, 2019
The Apex Court in the case
of Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai-I v. Bombay Dyeing &
Manufacturing Company Limited, reported in 2007 (215) E.L.T. 3
(S.C.) has held that where before the utilization of the credit amount,
if the entry is reversed, it amounts to not taking credit. Once the credit
is reversed before its utilization in the Cenvat account it does not
amount to taking of credit. Thus, the provisions of Rule 14 of Cenvat
Credit Rules and Section 11AB of the Act are not attracted and neither
the penalty nor the interest is chargeable.
Commissioner Of Central Excise, ... vs M/S Maruti Udyog Ltd. on 31 August, 2015
The Division Bench of
Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of Commissioner of Central
Excise, Delhi-III v. Maruti Udyog Limited, reported in 2007 (214)
E.L.T. 173 (P & H) has held that the Assessee is not liable to pay
interest as the credit was only taken as an entry in the Modvat record
and was not in fact utilized. Against the above decision of the Punjab &
Haryana High Court, Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No. CC3915/2007
filed by Commissioner of Central Excise, Delhi-III has been rejected by
9
Excise Appeal No.78564 of 2018
the Apex Court on 14-5-2007 [2007 (214) E.L.T. A50 (S.C.)]. The
decisions cited by the learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel are
distinguishable and do not apply to the facts of the present case.
Commissioner Of Central Excise ... vs Bill Forge Pvt Ltd on 8 June, 2016
Similar view has been taken in the case
of Commissioner of Central Excise v. M/s. International Auto Limited
(supra), wherein it was held that -
Section 2 in The Central Excise Act, 1944 [Entire Act]
Cce, Delhi-Iv vs M/S.Dee Development Engineers (P) Ltd on 1 April, 2015
10. Relying on the above decisions, the Hon'ble Madras High Court in
CCE vs. Strategic Engineering (P) Ltd 2014 (310) ELT 509 (Mad) has
observed that :-