CESTAT CHENNAI BENCH vide F.O. No. 845/09  dt 13/07/09 in re: CCEX CHENNAI vs PARACOAT PRODUCTS (P) LTD held as follows : -

QUOTE : The issue in dispute in this appeal is the eligibility to CENVAT / MODVAT credit on plastic crates and bins used as material handling equipment within the factory for internal transportation of goods.

I have heard both sides and find that the issue stands now settled in favour of the assessees by decision of the Larger Bench in BANCO PRODUCTS (India) LTD vs COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, VADODARA-I [2009-235-ELT 636 (Trib-LB). The Tribunal has held that CENVAT / MODVAT credit is admissible on plastic crates as capital goods and the Larger Bench has also held that the plastic crates are inputs for the purpose of eligibility of MODVAT credit. Following the decision of the Larger Bench cited supra, I uphold the impugned order and reject the appeal. UNQUOTE

In the following Final Orders also, the same Chennai Bench took the same decision as mentioned above : -

F.O. No. 842/09 dt 14/07/09  in re: CCE CHENNAI vs FIEM INDUSTRIES LTD  & 836/09 dt 13/07/09 in re: CCEX PONDICHERRY vs LEO FASTENERS LTD. 

[for full text of the judgement please visit http://www.taxesinindia.com and click on the citations taxind_2009_szb_c_845 , taxind_2009_szb_c_842 & taxind_2009_szb_c_836]

TRIBUNAL ORDERS

VENKATRAMAN RAGGHUPATHY, Web admin.

CESTAT ORDERS bins capital goods, CENVAT, credit, input, MODVAT, plastic crates

CESTAT CHENNAI BENCH vide F.O.848-849/09 dt 15/07/09 in re: CCEX [ST] CHENNAI vs VISTEON POWERTRAIN CONTROL SYSTEMS LTD. & I.M. GEARS P. LTD held as follows : -

QUOTE : I have heard both sides and find that the issue is now no longer RES INTEGRA as it stands settled in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue by the decision of the Larger Bench of the Tribunal in the case of CCE MUMBAI vs GTC INDUSTRIES LTD [2008-12-STR-468 -Tri.-LB]. The Bench has held that outdoor catering service is input service and, therefore, CENVAT credit is admissible thereon. Following the ratio of the above decision, I uphold the impugned order and extend the credit, and dismiss the two appeals. UNQUOTE

[for full text of the judgement, please visit http://www.taxesinindia.com  and click on the citation taxind_2009_szb_c_848_849]

TRIBUNAL ORDERS

VENKATRAMAN RAGGHUPATHY, Web admin.

CESTAT ORDERS catering, CENVAT, credit, outdoor, SERVICE TAX

CESTAT CHENNAI BENCH vide Final Order No. 850-851/09 dt 15/07/09 in re: LUCAS TVS LTD & INDIA JAPAN LIGHTING PVT. LTD vs CCEX CHENNAI held as follows : -

QUOTE : The issue in dispute in the present case, namely, as to whether interest is leviable on differential duty payable on the strength of supplimentary invoices stands settled against the assessee by a recent decision of the Apex Court in COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE PUNE vs SKF INDIA LTD. The Apex Court has held that interest is leviable on delayed or deferred payment of duty for whatever reasons and since differential duty was paid only later when the assessee issued supplimentary invoices to its customers, it was clearly a case of shrt payment of duty and thus the payment of differential duty clearly fell under sub-section (2B) of Section 11A and attracted levy of interest under Section 11AB of the Central Excise Act. Following the ratio of the decision cited supra, the impugned orders are upheld and the appeals are dismissed. UNQUOTE.

Same decision was taken by the same bench vide F.Os.  No. 843-844/09 dt 14.07.09 in re: AXLES INDIA LTD vs CCEX CHENNAI and 837/09 DT 13/07/09 in re : REDEEMA vs CCEX CHENNAI.

[for full text of the judgements please visit http://www.taxesinindia.com and click on the citations taxind_2009_szb_c_850_851 , taxind_2009_szb_c_843_844 &  taxind_2009_szb_c_837 ]

TRIBUNAL ORDERS

VENKATRAMAN RAGGHUPATHY, Web admin.

CESTAT ORDERS differential duty, interest, supplimentary invoices