Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2016 (11) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2016 (11) TMI 683 - CESTAT MUMBAIWhether an amount of duty partly paid through PLA on the molasses which are consumed captively for manufacture of ethyl alcohol (denatured or potable) under exemption in terms of Notification No. 67/95-CE is correct and whether duty paid only after detection of duty evasion will be admissible as cenvat credit or otherwise? - Held that: - the appellant is not seriously contesting that part as to duty liability has been discharged after being detected by the officers and a show cause notice has been issued for invoking the extended period. If that be so, availment of cenvat credit by the appellant is incorrect as the provisions of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002 do not permit the availment of cenvat credit wherein duty has been paid on being found that duty was evaded by suppression, fraud, collusion or misstatement. To that extent, we hold that the impugned order is correct and legal. Since we are upholding the cenvat credit ineligible, we also hold that the adjudicating authority was correct in confirming the demands with interest and also imposing equivalent amount of penalty. The main appellant’s appeal on this is rejected. Imposition of personal penalty on distillery in-charge - Rule 13(1) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002 - Held that: - no specific role has been attributed to him except by a bland statement that he being in-charge of the distillery unit, was aware that credit was availed of an amount which was inadmissible. We do not find any reason to uphold such imposition of penalty. Accordingly, the penalty imposed on the individual is set aside. Appeal disposed off - decided partly in favor of appellant.
|