Varroc Engineering Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.

Varroc Engineering Pvt. Ltd. vs Commissioner of C. Ex.

Type Court Judgment Court Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai Decided Jun 10, 2005

~1 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/39323

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/39323
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Judge: K Kumar
Decided On: Jun 10, 2005
Subject: Excise

Case Summary

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

Excise

Key legal issue: Excise

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Varroc Engineering Pvt. Ltd.

Respondent

Commissioner of C. Ex.

Excerpt

1. heard both sides. the id. counsel for the appellant submitted that in view of the provisions as contained in rule 4(2)(a) read with rule 3(5) of the cenvat credit rules, 2001, the appellant has rightly availed 50% credit on the duty paid on the imported goods. the condition of availments of credit based on possession and use by the appellant of the machine in question in the subsequent year, applies only with the respect to 50% of the balance credit. since the appellant has claimed only first 50% credit as per the aforesaid rules, the adjudicating authorities have wrongly rejected the credit amount. i fully agree with the id. consultant. the appeal is, therefore, allowed.

Full Judgment

1. Heard both sides. The Id. Counsel for the appellant submitted that in view of the provisions as contained in Rule 4(2)(a) read with Rule 3(5) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2001, the appellant has rightly availed 50% credit on the duty paid on the imported goods. The condition of availments of credit based on possession and use by the appellant of the machine in question in the subsequent year, applies only with the respect to 50% of the balance credit. Since the appellant has claimed only first 50% credit as per the aforesaid rules, the Adjudicating Authorities have wrongly rejected the credit amount. I fully agree with the Id. Consultant. The appeal is, therefore, allowed.

Same Court & Year Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumb... Same Parties Varroc Engineering Pvt. Ltd. vs Commissioner of C. Ex. Same Subject Excise Same Judge K Kumar