TMI Blog2015 (10) TMI 108X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ble Karnataka High court in the said decision says that before utilisation of credit if the entry has been reversed, it amounts to not taking credit. - cases where CENVAT credit though wrongly taken not utilised, interest and penalty cannot be recovered from assessee. - Decided in favour of assessee. - Appeal(s) Involved : E/1248/2012-SM - Final Order No. 21940 / 2015 - Dated:- 16-9-2015 - Shri Ashok K. Arya, Technical Member For the Petitioner : Ms. Preetha, Advocate For the Respondent : Shri Mohd. Yousuf, Addl. Commissioner(AR) ORDER Per : ASHOK K. ARYA Both the parties have been heard in detail. 2. The matter concerns the liability of the interest on the CENVAT credit taken for the inputs which had been s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ys that these two case laws specifically held that interest and penalty are not liable to be recovered when CENVAT credit was wrongly taken but not utilised. 4. The learned AR Shri Mohammed Yousuf has argued that interest and penalty are always recoverable both for the periods prior to the said amendment made in 2015 and also after the said amendment made in the Explanation to sub-rule 7 of Rule 4 of the Rules, wherever CENVAT credit has been wrongly taken or utilised by an assessee. The learned AR cites Hon ble Supreme Court s decision in the case of UOI Vs. Ind-Swift Laboratories Ltd. [2011(265) ELT 3 (SC)] wherein it was held that interest is recoverable wherever CENVAT credit has either been taken wrongly or utilised wrongly. 5. I ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g itself would not compel the assessee to pay interest as well as penalty. Further, as pointed out earlier, the subsequent amendment has given befitting answer to all doubts existed earlier. Since, the subsequent amendment has cleared all doubts existed earlier in respect of Rule 14 of the said Rules, it is needless to say that the argument advanced by the learned counsel appearing for the appellant/Department is erroneous, whereas the argument advanced on the side of the respondent is really having merit and the substantial questions of law settled in the present Civil Miscellaneous Appeal are not having substance and altogether the present Civil Miscellaneous Appeal deserves to be dismissed. 6. Based on the facts on record, discussion ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
