Relief to Chettinad Cement: CESTAT sets aside denial of Cenvat Credit [Read Order]
![Relief to Chettinad Cement: CESTAT sets aside denial of Cenvat Credit [Read Order] Relief to Chettinad Cement: CESTAT sets aside denial of Cenvat Credit [Read Order]](https://www.taxscan.in/wp-content/uploads/2022/12/Chettinad-Cement-CESTAT-sets-aside-denial-of-Cenvat-Credit-TAXSCAN.jpg)
The Chennai Bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), set aside deial of Cenvat Credit, granting relief to M/s. Chettinad Cement Corporation Private Limited, the appellant.
The Counsel for the appellant, Ranjani Sivaraman, submitted that the present appeal is the second round of litigation and the Bench was pleased to take cognizance of the pleadings that the work orders issued by the appellant also incorporated the collection of fly ash and transportation to their manufacturing premises, which limited fact was directed to be ascertained and the matter came to be remanded to the file of the Original Authority.
The Counsel also contended that the Adjudicating Authority himself has reproduced copies of the work orders in which the job description involves “operation and maintenance charge for dry fly ash collection system”, which includes the transportation of the same and concluded that the denial of CENVAT Credit and demanding the tax thereon was clearly uncalled for since the Order-in-Original has been passed without adhering to the directions of the Bench.
The Counsel for the Revenue, Sridevi Taritla, submitted that that an opportunity to furnish supporting documents, as per the directions of this Bench, was provided to the appellant, but the same having not been done, the Adjudicating Authority has proceeded on the basis of available materials and that therefore, there was no error in the orders of the lower authorities.
The Tribunal of P Dinesha, Judicial Member observed that “I find merit in the contentions of the Learned Advocate for the appellant that the job description in the work order was referring to “operational and maintenance charge for dry fly ash collection system”, which is contrary to the conclusion drawn by the Adjudicating Authority.”
The Tribunal also noted that the Order-in-Original cannot stand as the same is passed not only without adhering to the directions of this Bench, but also omitting to properly take note of the contents / job description in the work orders reproduced by him.
To Read the full text of the Order CLICK HERE
Support our journalism by subscribing to TaxscanAdFree. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates.