Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2018 (11) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (11) TMI 10 - CESTAT MUMBAIPenalty - CENVAT Credit on input services - irregular availment - benefit of Section 11A(2) of the Act for non issuance of show cause notice, only for imposition of penalty - Whether under the circumstances of the case, the provisions of the sub-rule (2) of Rule 15 of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 read with Section 11AC of the Act can be invoked, justifying imposition of penalty on the appellant? Held that:- Sub-rule (2) of Rule 15 of the Rules mandates that in case of wrong availment or utilisation of CENVAT credit, attributable to the reason of fraud, collusion or willful misstatement or suppression of facts, or contravention of any of the provisions of the Excise Act, or of the rules made thereunder, with intent to evade payment of duty, then the manufacturer shall also be liable to pay penalty in terms of the provisions of Section 11AC of the Act. The undisputed facts are that the availment of irregular CENVAT credit was disclosed by the appellant in the monthly ER-1 returns filed before the department and the credit so availed was not utilized for payment of Central Excise duty on removal of the final products. This fact is evident from the records of the appellant that it had huge balance of CENVAT credit at the time between taking of such irregular credit and subsequent reversal thereof. Thus, under the circumstances of the case, it cannot be said that taking of irregular CENVAT credit was due to fraudulent intent on the part of the appellant to defraud the Government revenue. Penalty do not sustain - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
|