2015 (8) TMI 1351 - AT - Central Excise

Interest - penalty - time limitation - Held that - as per the statutory requirement the reversal particulars were furnished in the monthly returns the show cause notice was required to be issued within one year from the date of filing of such returns - As the show cause notice in this case has been issued in 2008 in my opinion the same is barred by limitation of time since the fact of taking irregular credit was known to the Department way-back in 2003 - demand set aside on ground of limitation - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.

Summary

Issues: Confirmation of interest on account of late payment of Central Excise Duty and imposition of penalty

Confirmation of interest on late payment of Central Excise Duty:
The appellant reversed the duty on inputs used in manufacturing exempted goods in the Cenvat account from February 2003 to July 2003. The appellant argued that since the duty payment details were known to the Central Excise Department in 2003, the show cause notice issued in 2008 was time-barred. The appellant contended that the recovery of interest and penalty was not sustainable due to the limitation of time. The tribunal agreed with the appellant, stating that the show cause notice should have been issued within one year from the date of filing the returns, as the reversal particulars were communicated in the monthly returns. As the notice was issued in 2008 despite the Department's knowledge of the irregular credit in 2003, the tribunal held that it was barred by limitation. Consequently, the impugned order confirming the demand was set aside solely on the ground of limitation, and the appeal was allowed in favor of the appellant.

Imposition of penalty:
The judgment primarily focused on the issue of limitation in the context of interest on late payment of Central Excise Duty. The tribunal did not delve into the merits of the case regarding the imposition of the penalty. The appellant's argument regarding the limitation of time and the communication of reversal particulars in the monthly returns was central to the decision, leading to the setting aside of the impugned order. Therefore, the issue of penalty imposition was not extensively discussed in the judgment, with the tribunal's decision primarily revolving around the time limitation aspect in relation to the interest on late payment of Central Excise Duty.

This detailed analysis of the judgment highlights the significance of timely issuance of show cause notices and the communication of relevant particulars in monthly returns in matters concerning the confirmation of interest on late payment of Central Excise Duty. The tribunal's decision underscores the importance of adherence to statutory requirements and time limitations in such cases, ultimately resulting in the setting aside of the impugned order on grounds of limitation.