TMI Blog2013 (11) TMI 1214X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hat credit was taken by the appellant on bonafide belief and reversed the entire credit when pointed out, then there cannot be a case of imposition of penalty under Rule 15(2) OF CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 read with Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944 – relying upon Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd Vs CCE Mumbai-V [2012 (12) TMI 853 - CESTAT, MUMBAI ] – Decided in favour of Assessee. - Appeal No.E/499/2012-SM - - - Dated:- 6-9-2013 - MR. H.K. THAKUR, J. For the Appellant: Shri S.J. Vyas, Adv. For the Respondent: Shri P.N. Sarvaiya, Astt. Commissioner (A.R.) JUDGEMENT Per: H.K. Thakur This appeal has been filed by the appellant M/s Multibase India Limited, Kadaiya, Daman. The issue involved is that appellant has taken ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d [2013 (289) ELT 331 (Tri-Del)] vii) Mahindra Mahindra Ltd Vs CCE Mumbai-V [2012 (286) ELT 369 (Tri-Mum)] viii) SRF Ltd Vs. CCE Chennai [2012 (280) ELT 554 (Tri-Che.)] ix) M/s Dr.Reddys Laboratories Ltd Vs CCE Hyderabad [2013-TIOL-934-CESTAT-BANG] 3. Shri P.N. Sarvaiya, (A.R.) appearing on behalf of the Revenue defended the stand taken by the first appellate authority. 4. Heard both sides and perused the case records. It is observed from the case laws relied upon by the appellant that it has been the consistent view of the Courts that once CENVAT Credit taken is not utilized and subsequently reversed, there is no liability to pay interest. In the case of the appellant as the incorrect credit wrongly taken was not utilized and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ommissioner of C.Ex., Mumbai-I v. Bombay Dyeing Mfg. Co. Ltd., 2007 (215) E.L.T. 3 (S.C.) wherein the assessee therein had reversed the entry before utilization, it was held that the same amounts to not taking credit. 5. So far as imposition of penalty under Rule 15(2) of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 read with Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944 is concerned, it has been observed by the adjudicating authority in Para 12 of the OIO No. dt.28.10.2011 that appellant has taken CENVAT Credit under the bonafide belief. Once adjudicating authority is convinced that credit was taken by the appellant on bonafide belief and reversed the entire credit when pointed out, then there cannot be a case of imposition of penalty under Rule 15(2) OF ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
