Hyderabad: A two-judge panel of the Telangana High Court admitted a Central Excise Appeal filed against ITC Ltd for claiming input tax credit for inputs consumed in the manufacture of exempted goods. The panel comprising Justice Sujoy Paul and Justice Namavarapu Rajeshwar Rao are dealing with an appeal filed by Customs and Central Excise Offices and Contacts, Hyderabad III. The appeal challenges an order of the Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal [CESTAT] whereby an order was passed in favour of ITC Paperboards and Specialty Papers Division. The appellant argues that the assessee, a manufacturer of paper and paperboards, in the process of manufacture of paper and paperboards, an intermediary good is paper pulp/wood pulp which is an exempted good and an assessee cannot claim input tax credit for the inputs consumed in the manufacture of exempted goods. The appellant contended that the assessee claimed Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal [CESTAT] credit for the inputs used for the manufacture of paper pulp which was exempted from excise duty. CENVAT credit scheme allows a manufacturer and a service provider to avail credit of duty of excise paid on inputs or capital goods and service tax paid on input services. Such credit could be utilised for payment of duty of excise on final products or service tax on the taxable output services provided by them. The assessee by relying upon the CENVAT credit rules said that on reversal of the Input Tax Credit, they would not be liable for penalty and also challenged the department’s assessment of the value of Input Tax Credit. Dominique Fernandes, counsel for the appellant argued that the department assessment was according to CENVAT credit rules and sought for dismissal of order of CESTAT. The panel after hearing the parties admitted the appeal and posted the matter for further hearing.
HC modifies order on Moinabad land
A two-judge panel of the Telangana High Court on Thursday modified orders of the single judge on 5 acres of prime land in Moinabad mandal of Rangareddy district. Earlier, Chintakindi Rajeshwar Reddy and four others filed a writ petition challenging the action of the authorities in including the property in the prohibitory list on the ground that an injunction petition was pending. It was contended in the petition that they had approached the registration authorities for sale of the property in question and it was refused on the ground that there was a civil dispute and an order of injunction by the civil court. It was also argued in the writ petition that the court was misled on certain aspects including a subsisting injunction. In the writ petition it was earlier contended by the writ petitioners that there was no injunction by the civil court on the basis of which the writ petition was closed. However, when two senior counsels represented to the court the details of the pending injunction, the court recalled its earlier order. The original writ petitioners would then contend that the this had become infructuous in view of the pendency of the suit and therefore the writ may be closed. The court refused to give such relief. It further set aside the registration and the sale deeds. Aggrieved by this, the present writ appeal is filed by the writ petitioners. The panel modified the order by clarifying that the registration of the sale deeds was in deed, void as declared by the single judge. It, however, clarified that this did not inhibit the claims of writ petitioner regarding the sale deeds and the right to adjudicate the same before the appropriate forum.
HC faults Banjara Hills sub-registrar
Justice N.V. Shravan Kumar of the Telangana High Court faulted the sub-registrar, Banjara Hills for failure to carry out his basic duties. He was required to endorse the sale deed based on a Decree of the Senior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad. The judge called upon the sub-registrar forthwith to carry out the task failing which he would be required to be present in court to explain his inaction. The judge was dealing with the writ petition filed by Syed Dost Ahmed Khan questioning the illegal, malafide and arbitrary exercise of powers by the said respondent authority.
HC reserves order on widow’s RB plea
Justice C.V. Bhaskar Reddy of the Telangana High Court reserved its verdict in a writ plea of a widow complaining of denial of Rythu Bandhu Insurance on the ground of age disqualification. D. Muttamma moved the High Court seeking insurance benefits contending the deceased farmer during his lifetime had approached the authorities stating that his date of birth was incorrectly recorded on his Aadhaar card. The widow contended that the correction would render him ineligible for benefits, as it placed him outside the qualifying age bracket of 18-59 years stipulated by the GO MS 63. The petitioner would now complain that the authorities were not granting the pension based on the date of birth as earlier recorded in the Aadhar Card.
HC orders contempt notice to FCI
Justice T. Madhavi Devi of the Telangana High Court ordered notice to the Food Corporation of India (FCI) in a contempt case. G. Bheema Naik, depot manager at FCI, complained in the petition that earlier the judge directed FCI to consider his representation for promotion as assistant general manager by applying provisions of Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016, within a period of four weeks. The said provision provides for “Every appropriate government shall appoint in every government establishment, not less than four per cent of the total number of vacancies in the cadre strength in each group of posts meant to be filled with persons with benchmark disabilities of which, one per cent. each shall be reserved for persons with benchmark disabilities under clauses (a), (b) and (c) and one percent for persons with benchmark disabilities under clauses (d) and (e).” The petitioner alleged that though the directions were issued way back in February, FCI wantonly failed to comply with the orders and thus, committed contempt.
