New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous

2015 (10) TMI 1230 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD

2015 (10) TMI 1230 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD - TMI - Imposition of penalties - Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules, 2004 - improper credit on the CVD paid on inputs at the time of import - Held that:- In view of the settled proposition of law [2013 (12) TMI 749 - CESTAT NEW DELHI] for taking improper CENVAT credit on imported goods no penalty can be imposed upon individually under Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002. - Decided in favour of assessee. - Appeal No : E/10229-10231,/2013, E/10423,1050 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

f the Revenue argued that in these proceedings M/s. Nitin Alloys Global Ltd., took CENVAT credit on certain documents without receipt of inputs. That the entire CENVAT credit of ₹ 16,60,129/- was paid by M/s. Nitin Alloys Global Ltd., alongwith interest and M/s. Nitin Alloys Global Ltd. has not filed any appeal again the said O.I.O No. 32/ADC/OA/VAPI/2011-12 Dated 23.01.2012. That penalty on the Respondents has been correctly imposed under Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002. Learned .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

el.)] to argue that this was also held in this case law that Director of a Company cannot be visited with a penalty for taking improper credit. 4. Heard both sides and perused the case records. The issue involved in the present proceedings is imposition of penalties upon on the appellants under Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules, 2004 for taking improper credit on the CVD paid on inputs at the time of import. Learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the appellants argued that for taking CENVAT c .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

m both sides and perused the records. The allegation against the appellant is that he intentionally allowed availment of Cenvat credit on the basis of bogus invoices issued by three registered dealers in a fraudulent manner. As such there is no allegation against the appellant that he had dealt with any excisable goods which he knew or had reason to believe were liable to confiscation. Under Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules, as the same stood during the period of dispute, penalty was imposabl .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 



|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version