2016 (12) TMI 977

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... acts of the case are that the appellant, M/s.Xomox Sanmar Ltd. (Unit-I) have another Unit-II in adjacent premises for which separate registration has been obtained.  It emerged that the appellant had availed cenvat credit of Rs. 12,91,728/- for the period Oct 2008 to Jan 2009 being input service credit, however relating only to Unit-II.  Hence it was alleged that appellant had wrongly ta .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... d. Counsel submits that the improper availment of cenvat credit occurred only on account of inadvertent error and that there is no fraud, suppression, or collusion involved in the same, hence there was no ground for imposing equal penalty on them. 3.  On behalf of the department, Ld. A.R reiterated the correctness of the impugned order. Further, he states that the very fact that the appellan .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... From the facts available before me, it is not disputed that both the units were situated adjacent to each other. In fact, demarcation of the second unit was carved out from the erstwhile premises of the present one. I am of the considered opinion therefore, that the appellant has to be given benefit of doubt that its improper availment of credit was only on account of inadvertent error. It is also .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X