Sponsored
    Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Synthokem Labs Pvt Limited Vs Commissioner of Central Tax (CESTAT Hyderabad)
Appeal Number : Excise Appeal No. 30595/ 2019
Date of Judgement/Order : 09/11/2021
Related Assessment Year :
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Sponsored

Synthokem Labs Pvt Limited Vs Commissioner of Central Tax (CESTAT Hyderabad)

The only issue remains now is as to whether the case in hand was merely a case of wrong apportionment of credit between the appellants both units, a bonafide clerical error or it was a case of intentional malafide intention to evade payment of duty. Though the amount was not proportionately bifurcated between both the units of the appellants but simultaneously it is an admitted fact that the amount of Rs. 2,54,199/- was not further distributed to the second unit of the appellant despite being claimed by the first unit. So the eligibility of claim of credit of Rs. 8,28,621/- stand admitted. This is sufficient for me to hold that there has been no evasion but only an error between the two units of the appellant for availing the credit without bifurcating the same inter se. However, deficiency was made good even before the issue of impugned show cause notice dated 28.7.2013 and the credit were properly being recorded in their ER 1 returns at the time of taking the same and also at the time of reversing the same. Once those have been properly recorded in the books of accounts of the appellants, the allegation of intentional evasion remains only assumption having no legs to stand upon.

FULL TEXT OF THE CESTAT HYDERABAD ORDER

The Order-in-Appeal No. 002-003-19-20 dated 16.09.2019 has been assailed vide the impugned appeal. The appellants herein are engaged in the manufacture of bulk drugs and are availing the CENVAT Credit on inputs, capital goods and input services. They are simultaneously utilising the same for payment of duty on their final products. During the course of Audit of records of the appellant, the Audit officers noticed that the appellants have short paid the service tax and had erroneously availed the CENVAT credit for the period 2013-2014 to 2014-2015-2016 for the following:

i) Excess availment of input service credit of Rs.6,89,256/- in the ER-1 returns;

Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.

Sponsored

Join Taxguru’s Network for Latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Sponsored
Sponsored
Sponsored
Search Post by Date
August 2024
M T W T F S S
 1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
262728293031