TMI Blog2013 (1) TMI 505X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... erefore, the applicants took the CENVAT credit of CVD paid by the importer Whether the CVD was paid on detection by the Customs, therefore, applicants are not entitled to take CENVAT credit of CVD paid by the importer as per Rule 9(1)(b) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 Held that:- The Penalty u/s 114A of the Customs Act, 1962 is leviable for demand of additional amount of duty on account of fraud, collusion, willful mis-statement, suppression of facts and nonpayment of duty with an intent to evade payment of duty and on that amount credit is not available as per Rule 9(1)(2) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. In this case, no additional amount of duty has also been confirmed against the applicants, therefore, prima facie, the appl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e penalties. The duty of Rs. 18,01,115/- is having a component of Rs. 11,58,012/- as CVD. As the importer firm was taken over from the applicants, therefore, the applicants took the CENVAT credit of CVD paid by the importer. During the course of audit, it was pointed out that as the CVD was paid on detection by the Customs, therefore, applicants are not entitled to take CENVAT credit of CVD paid by the importer as per Rule 9(1)(b) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. Show-cause notice was issued, matter was adjudicated, and impugned demands were confirmed by both the lower authorities. Aggrieved by the said order, applicants are before us seeking waiver of pre-deposit of duty, interest and penalty. 2. Shri S. Jaikumar, learned counsel for th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d the fact of value of the impugned goods by misdeclaring the value they are not entitled to take credit as per Rule 9(1)(b) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. 4. Heard both sides and considered their submissions. As contended by the learned Advocate for the applicants, penalty under Section 114A of the Customs Act, 1962 is leviable for demand of additional amount of duty on account of fraud, collusion, willful mis-statement, suppression of facts and nonpayment of duty with an intent to evade payment of duty and on that amount credit is not available as per Rule 9(1)(2) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. In this case, no additional amount of duty has also been confirmed against the applicants, therefore, we find that prima facie, the applic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
