TMI Blog2018 (7) TMI 1600X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... There is no material on record to establish fraud, collusion, willful misstatement or suppression of facts on the part of the appellant - penalty u/s 78 of the Finance Act is unwarranted and is set aside. The matter is remanded to the Adjudicating Authority for verification of the documents and to pass order in accordance with law - appeal allowed by way of remand. - ST/75541/2018 - FO/A/76416/2018 - Dated:- 6-7-2018 - SHRI P. K. CHOUDHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER Shri Kaushik Dasgupta, Assistant Vice President (Indirect Taxation) for the Appellant (s) Shri H. S. Abedin, A.C. (AR) for the Respondent ORDER Per Shri P. K. Choudhary Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the appellant (formerly known as Lafarge ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. On appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the adjudication order. Hence, the present appeal. 2. The ld. Representative of for the appellant company submitted that the availment of CENVAT Credit on services such as rent-a-cab service, health care service and interior decorator service were due to an error on the part of the appellant and had not been done with any mala fide intent. He further stated that as per Section 73(3) of the Finance Act, if a person has paid the tax liability on the basis of his own ascertainment or on the basis of tax ascertained by a Central Excise Officer, before service of show cause notice, no notice can be served in respect of such tax already paid. He further stated that Purch ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ued in favour of another ISD cannot be allowed as that would mean a total diversion from the principles of the system. If this is allowed in case of one firm, then every other firm might avail CENVAT Credit on bills issued in the name of other units / offices which would defeat the very purpose of ISD. Moreover, in this case, the appellant has not placed before me any evidence from where it can be surely inferred that the Mumbai office had not distributed the CENVAT Credit arising out of the same set of invoices on the basis of which the Kolkata unit i.e. the appellant availed and distributed the credit. Rather, they have chosen to rely on a plethora of case laws which I find to be inapplicable as there is no proof before me to establish th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
