75th Founding Day Lecture Meeting on “India@2030” Know More

January 2013

2012 (28) STR 380 (Tri.-Mumbai) Jyoti Structures Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Nasik

By Puloma Dalal, Jayesh Gogri, Chartered Accountants
Reading Time 1 mins
fiogf49gjkf0d
One to one co-relation not required for utilisation of CENVAT credit for payment of excise duty or service tax.

Facts:

The appellants, a manufacturer of transmission towers also provides erection, commissioning and installation, management, maintenance or repairs, testing, inspection of these towers services. For discharging Central Excise Duty and Service tax liability, the appellants utilised CENVAT Credit. The department denied utilisation of CENVAT Credit for payment of Central Excise Duty on the dutiable final product and output services on the grounds that the appellants did not maintain separate books of accounts for inputs and input services utilised in the manufacture of final products and used in providing output services.

Held:

Following Tribunal’s decision in case of Forbes Marshall Pvt. Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Pune 2010 (258) ELT 571 (Tri.), the Tribunal held that there was no provision under CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 for segregation of CENVAT Credit for payment of Central Excise Duty and Service tax liability.

Download PDF

You May Also Like

2012 (28) STR 364 (Tri.-Del.) C.C.E., Chandigarh vs. Amar Nath Aggarwal Builders Pvt. Ltd.

2012 (28) STR 391 (Tri.-Mumbai) Skoda Auto India Pvt. Ltd. vs. Commissioner of C. Ex., Aurangabad