9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (11) TMI 843X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ot/billet falling under Chapter 72 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. The Appellant had installed a Captive Power Plant for generation of electricity and used the same in the manufacture of their final products. For the purposes of generation of electricity, the Appellant used various inputs and input services, on which they have availed cenvat credit. The allegation of the Department is that since a part of generated electricity utilizing the inputs on which cenvat credit availed, were sold outsiders, therefore, the Appellants are not eligible to cenvat credit on the inputs or required to discharge 10% of the value of electricity generated and sold to outsiders. In the meantime, the Govt. of India has brought a retrospective amendment ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion 72/73 of the Finance Act, 2010. The ld. Advocate has submitted that the impugned order passed by the ld. Commissioner imposing penalty of Rs.2.00 lakhs on the Appellant, is un-sustainable in view of Explanation II to sub-section (5) of Section 72/73 of the Finance Act, 2010, wherein it has been laid down that no penalty be imposed on reversal of proportionate credit. The ld. Advocate has further referred to the judgement of the Tribunal in the case of Standards INTL. Precision Engineers P.Ltd. Vs. CCEx., Bangalore II reported in 2010 (258) ELT 456 (Tri.-Bang.), wherein this Tribunal on similar facts and circumstances, has set aside the penalty imposed. The ld. Advocate has further submitted that even though Rule 15 (1) had not been invo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... es on reversal of the credit for the relevant period. The said Explanation reads as follows : Explanation. - For the removal of doubts, it is hereby declared that no act or omission on the part of any person shall be punishable as an offence which would not have been so punishable had this section not come into force. I agree with the submissions of the ld. Advocate for the Appellant that in view of the specific Explanation contained in the said retrospective amendment no penalty could be imposed. The ld. Advocate drew my attention to the findings of the ld. Commissioner, wherein the ld. Commissioner himself had acknowledged that both the Department and the Assessee were in a wr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
