TMI Blog2017 (3) TMI 164X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to be availed by the credit only because of the wrong application of formulae - there were divergent views with regard to the interpretation and the application of the formulae. The appellants have reversed the credit immediately on pointing out the same by the department. Therefore there is no evidence to establish any suppression of facts with an intention to evade payment of duty - penalty set ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lying the said formulae. Both the authorities below have confirmed the demand of ₹ 2,25,908/- along with interest and imposed equal amount of penalty under section 11AC of Central Excise Act. Hence the appellants are now before the Tribunal. 2. On behalf of the appellant, Ld. Consultant Sh. Anil Kumar submitted that there was frequent changes in the formulae prescribed under Rule 3(7)(a) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . That the department has issued show cause notice only with regard to the excess credit availed. 3. On behalf of the department, the Ld. AR Sh. P.S. Reddy reiterated the findings in the impugned order. He submitted that the appellants having availed excess credit are liable to pay the penalty also. The credit could not have been come to light unless the department pointed out and therefore th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... multiplied by {(1+BCD/200) multiplied by (CVD/100)} c. For the period 05.12.2008 to 06.09.2009 X multiplied by {(1+BCD/200) multiplied by (CVD/100)} 5. It is also noted that there were divergent views with regard to the interpretation and the application of the formulae. The appellants have reversed the credit immediately on pointing out the same by the department. Therefore there is no ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
