Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2015 (7) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (7) TMI 624 - CESTAT BANGALORECENVAT Credit - Capital goods - Imposition of penalty - the appellant took the stand that these items have been used as inputs. However, they were not able to produce any evidence to show as to where exactly these items have been used and which components / accessories have been manufactured out of these inputs and used in their factory. - Held that:- There is a difference between Bajaj Hindusthan Ltd. case and the present case. In the case of Bajaj Hindusthan Ltd. (2013 (3) TMI 365 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT), it was the claim of the appellants that they had maintained proper records but on verification it was found that this was not so. In this case, I also take note of the fact that total amount involved is less than ₹ 1.40 lakhs. It was also submitted by learned counsel that credit was taken during construction of factory and therefore, some mistake could have happened. Having regard to the facts and circumstances, I consider that in this case, it may not be necessary to impose penalty. - Demand for Cenvat credit with interest is upheld. Penalty imposed on the appellant is set aside. - Decided in favour of assessee.
|