TMI Blog2014 (5) TMI 766X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... facts would have brought in the knowledge of the department and would have been paid the service tax attributable to inadmissible input service credit voluntarily by the appellant. As this act has not been done by the appellant, therefore it amounts that appellant knowingly availed wrongful input service credit, did not reverse the credit, this act of the appellant would amount to malafide intention to avail inadmissible credit - Decided against assessee. - APPEAL NO. ST/85255/14-Mum - - - Dated:- 3-4-2014 - Ashok Jindal, J. For the Appellant : Shri A.P. Kolte, Adv. For the Respondent : Shri V.K. Agarwal, Addl. Comm (AR) JUDGEMENT The appellant is in appeal against the impugned order along with an application for stay ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he demand along with interest and penalty under Section 77 and 78 of the Finance Act, 1994. Aggrieved by the same, the appellant is before me. 3. The ld. Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant submits that the appellant has not hidden any fact from the dept. as they were filing their service tax returns regularly showing that they are availing input service credit on the service received and also availing the benefit of abatement as per the Notification no. 1/06 and paying service tax. Therefore, the show-cause notice dated 13.09.2012 invoking the extended period of limitation is not sustainable when the fact of availment of input service credit and claiming benefit of abatement as per Notification no. 01/06 were well within the kn ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... duty of the appellant that these facts would have brought in the knowledge of the department and would have been paid the service tax attributable to inadmissible input service credit voluntarily by the appellant. As this act has not been done by the appellant, therefore it amounts that appellant knowingly availed wrongful input service credit, did not reverse the credit, this act of the appellant would amount to malafide intention to avail inadmissible credit. The case law relied upon by the ld. counsel states that it is to be seen the mindset of the appellant/assessee whether they have malafide intention or not? When the fact of wrongful availment of Cenvat credit came to the knowledge of the appellant and, the appellant remained silent, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
