In this appeal, the revenue challenged an order allowing Cenvat credit on tool kits supplied with vehicles. The High Court dismissed the appeal, holding the issue covered by prior judgments favoring the assessee.
The appeal was dismissed, and the order of the Tribunal allowing Cenvat credit was upheld.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
CEA No.42 of 2013 (O&M) 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.
CEA No..42 of 2013 (O&M) Date of Decision: 27.9.2013
Commissioner of Central Excise, Delhi-II Appellant
Versus
M/s Hero Motocorp Limited and another ..Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIVE BHALLA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DR BHARAT BHUSHAN PARSOON
Present:Mr. Sunish Bindlish, Advocate, for the appellant.
RAJIVE BHALLA, J. (ORAL)
CM No. 10855-CII of 2013
CM is allowed, as prayed.
CEA No..42 of 2013
The revenue challenges order dated 21.8.2012 passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi, on the ground that tool kits supplied along with vehicles, manufactured by the assessee, do not constitute inputs for claiming Cenvat credit.
After addressing arguments for some time, counsel for the appellant fairly concedes that controversy, in the present appeal, is covered against the revenue, by a judgment of this Court in CEA 52 of 2012, decided on 09.05.2013 (Commissioner of Central Excise Versus M/s Honda Motorcycle & Scooter India Pvt. Ltd.) pertaining to
the same assessee and a judgment in Tata Engineering & Varinder Kumar 2013.10.07 14:37 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh
CEA No.42 of 2013 (O&M) 2
Locomotive Company Limited, 1994 (72) ELT 525.
In view of the fact that controversy in the appeal is covered against the revenue by judgments in CEA 52 of 2012, decided on 09.05.2013 (Commissioner of Central Excise Versus M/s Honda Motorcycle & Scooter India Pvt. Ltd.) and Tata Engineering & Locomotive Company Limited, 1994 (72) ELT 525, the appeal is dismissed.
( RAJIVE BHALLA ) JUDGE
27.9.2013 ( DR. BHARAT BHUSHAN PARSOON) VK JUDGE
Varinder Kumar 2013.10.07 14:37 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh
1 issue framed by the court
Whether tool kits supplied along with vehicles constitute inputs for claiming Cenvat credit.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Commissioner of Central Excise Versus M/s Honda Motorcycle & Scooter India Pvt. Ltd.Followed¶14
CEA 52 of 2012
Tata Engineering & Locomotive Company LimitedFollowed¶17
1994 (72) ELT 525
Commissioner of Central Excise, Delhi-II
M/s Hero Motocorp Limited
another
RAJIVE BHALLA
DR BHARAT BHUSHAN PARSOON
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
