Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2015 (11) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (11) TMI 774 - AT - Central ExciseDemand of interest on reversal of CENVAT Credit - Invocation of extended period of limitation - Interest u/s 11AB - Penalty u/s 11AC - Held that:- The availment of inadmissible credit was never disclosed by the appellant to the department before the audit therefore department was not in position to ascertain whether the credit taken by the appellant is correct or wrong. In view of this position it can be conveniently concluded that there is clear suppression of fact on the part of the appellant and therefore extended period was rightly invoked. Hence the demand of Cenvat credit is held to be sustained. As regard the demand of interest under Rule 14 read with Section 11AB. - simply because the case was settled by Settlement Commission interest provision will not vary, Rule 14 is applicable irrespective whether it is a case settled by Settlement Commissioner or otherwise therefore on this ground Hon’ble Apex Court judgment can not be distinguished. I therefore held that the interest is chargeable from the date of taking credit in the Cenvat account of the appellant. As regard imposition of penalty under Section 11AC, as I held above extended period is rightly invoked and demand was also rightly confirmed by invoking proviso to Section 11A(1) the provision of Section 11AC would unavoidably attract and accordingly penalty under Section 11AC is sustainable. Even as per Hon’ble Supreme Court judgment in the case of Dharamendra Textile processor[2008 (9) TMI 52 - SUPREME COURT] penalty under Section 11AC neither can be waived nor can be reduced as it is in nature of mandatory penalty. Therefore, I do not find any infirmity in the impugned order - Decided against assessee.
|