Otis Elevator Co. (India) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.

Otis Elevator Co. (India) Ltd. vs Commissioner of C. Ex.

Type Court Judgment Court Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai Decided Aug 18, 2003

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/31887

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/31887
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Judge: S T C.
Decided On: Aug 18, 2003
Subject: Service Tax

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Service Tax

Key legal issue: Service Tax

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Otis Elevator Co. (India) Ltd.

Respondent

Commissioner of C. Ex.

Legal References

Reported In: (2003)(162)ELT846Tri(Mum.)bai

Excerpt

1. shri mahadevan, learned advocate for the appellants states that the appellants have been denied modvat credit amounting to rs. 49,181/- in respect of paints for the period of 26-6-1991 to 2-7-1993 though the same have been used in the manufacture of the finished goods. he also states that the appellants have been allowed similar benefit for the earlier period and the later period.2. shri hemant kotikar, learned s.d.r. appearing for the department states that the appellants had themselves through their letter dated 12-10-1999 had asked for deletion of paints from their earlier declaration and as such, denial of credit is justified on the basis of the appellant's own declaration. however, he has no explanation as to why the appellants were allowed credit on paints for the period october, 1989 to june/1991 and only the credit for the period from 12-6-1991 to 12-7-1991 was disallowed.3. after hearing both sides and perusal of case records, i find that there is no justification for disallowing the modvat credit in respect of inputs viz. paints only for a period of one month when such credit was allowed for earlier and later periods. as such, the impugned order is set aside with consequential relief to the appellants.

Full Judgment

1. Shri Mahadevan, learned Advocate for the appellants states that the appellants have been denied Modvat credit amounting to Rs. 49,181/- in respect of paints for the period of 26-6-1991 to 2-7-1993 though the same have been used in the manufacture of the finished goods. He also states that the appellants have been allowed similar benefit for the earlier period and the later period.

2. Shri Hemant Kotikar, learned S.D.R. appearing for the Department states that the appellants had themselves through their letter dated 12-10-1999 had asked for deletion of paints from their earlier declaration and as such, denial of credit is justified on the basis of the appellant's own declaration. However, he has no explanation as to why the appellants were allowed credit on paints for the period October, 1989 to June/1991 and only the credit for the period from 12-6-1991 to 12-7-1991 was disallowed.

3. After hearing both sides and perusal of case records, I find that there is no justification for disallowing the Modvat credit in respect of inputs viz. paints only for a period of one month when such credit was allowed for earlier and later periods. As such, the impugned order is set aside with consequential relief to the appellants.

Same Court & Year Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumb... Same Parties Otis Elevator Co. (India) Ltd. vs Commissioner of C. Ex. Same Subject Service Tax Same Judge S T C.