TMI Blog2014 (8) TMI 27X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t the appellant paid the amount before issue of show-cause notice and when it was found that interest liability was not fully discharged, they paid the balance, would go in favour of the appellants - this was not a case for invoking extended period for imposition of penalty - penalty imposed on the appellant is set aside and demand for wrongly availed Cenvat credit with interest is upheld as not challenged - Decided partly in favour of assessee. - ST/553/2012 - Final Order No. A/10072/2013-WZB/AHD - Dated:- 4-1-2013 - Shri B.S.V. Murthy, Member (T) Shri Paresh Sheth, Advocate, for the Appellant. Shri Shiv Kumar, AR, for the Respondent. ORDER During the course of audit of the records of the appellants, it was found that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by the fact that before receipt of show-cause notice, appellants had paid service tax and interest and once such amount is paid, proper action is to be taken to check the correctness of the amount paid and inform them about the same for which period of one year as provided in the statutory provision. Therefore, as soon as they were informed, the Interest was paid and balance amount was also paid in November, 2011. He submits that in view of the facts, appellants paid the money without challenging the same even though the audit party had pointed out the availment of credit before more than one year and appellants could have challenged the demand on the ground of limitation, appellants did not want to challenge denial of credit on technical ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at the original authority has sustained the extended period on the ground that the appellant had paid wrongly availed Cenvat credit after issue of show-cause notice only and, therefore, extended period is invocable. The Commissioner (A) has taken the view that the appellant is working under self-assessment scheme and he is bound to be honest in taking credit and discharging liability. Further he observes that the department has reason to believe that the appellant has done this with sole intention to avail undue benefit of Cenvat credit. The submission that appellants had filed return and shown all details of credit had not at all been considered and dealt with. Further, factually also, observations of the original authority that the amount ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
