M\/s. Elcomponics Sales Pvt. Ltd. Versus Commissioner of GST & Central Excise Chennai Outer
Central Excise
2018 (11) TMI 160 – CESTAT CHENNAI – TMI
CESTAT CHENNAI – AT
Dated:- 1-11-2018
Appeal No. E\/41886\/2018 – Final Order No. 42749\/2018
Central Excise
Ms. Sulekha Beevi C.S., Member (Judicial)
\nShri G. Thangaraj, Consultant for the Appellant
\nShri L. Nandakumar, AC (AR) for the Respondent
\nORDER
\nBrief facts are that on verification of accounts of the appellant, it was noticed that in the balance sheet of the year 2014 – 15, the appellant had made provisions for write off of old inputs but had not reversed the credit in respect of such inputs. On being pointed out, the appellant reversed the credit. However, show cau<\/p>\n
= = = = = = = =<\/p>\n
Plain text (Extract) only<\/strong> = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n n in the case of Strategic Engineering P. Ltd. – 2014 (310) ELT 509 (Mad.) and Tata Business Support Services Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Service Tax – 2017 (52) STR 346. = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n Plain text (Extract) only<\/strong> = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" M\/s. Elcomponics Sales Pvt. Ltd. Versus Commissioner of GST & Central Excise Chennai OuterCentral Excise2018 (11) TMI 160 – CESTAT CHENNAI – TMICESTAT CHENNAI – ATDated:- 1-11-2018Appeal No. E\/41886\/2018 – Final Order No. 42749\/2018Central ExciseMs. Sulekha Beevi C.S., Member (Judicial) Shri G. Thangaraj, Consultant for the Appellant Shri L. Nandakumar, AC (AR) for the Respondent … Continue reading “M\/s. Elcomponics Sales Pvt. Ltd. Versus Commissioner of GST & Central Excise Chennai Outer”<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-14816","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/14816","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=14816"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/14816\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=14816"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=14816"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=14816"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
For full text:-Visit the Source <\/a><\/p>\n
\n3. The ld. AR Shri L. Nandakumar supported the findings in the impugned order.
\n4. After hearing both sides, it is seen that the appellant has reversed the credit even before issuance of the show cause notice. It is also not the case of the department that they have utilized the credit. Following the decision of the Hon'ble High Court of Madras in the case of Strategic Engineering P. Ltd. (supra) as well as the decision of the Tribunal in Tata Business Support Services Ltd. (supra), I am of the view that the demand of interest and penalty cannot sustain. The same is set asid<\/p>\n
For full text:-Visit the Source <\/a><\/p>\n