TMI Blog2017 (3) TMI 1139X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ts recovery with interest and penalty confirmed by the authorities below is upheld - they are eligible to avail the benefit of discharging 25% of the penalty. With regard to the liability to the CENVAT credit on Outdoor Catering Service (Canteen Service), the principle is well settled by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CCE, Nagpur vs. Ultratech Cements Ltd. [2010 (10) TMI 13 - BOMB ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . M. Misra None present for the appellant. Heard the Ld. AR for Revenue. 2. In the written submission dated 01.02.2017, the appellant has submitted that two issues are involved in the present case viz.(i) recovery of CENVAT credit of ₹ 1,18,285/- wrongly availed by them in relation to shifting activities of their plant at Chennai, and (ii) credit of ₹ 89,809 availed on Outdoor C ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bmits that the credit availed for shifting of machineries at Chennai cannot be admissible to the appellant at their unit at Vadodara as it is not in or in relation to the manufacture of goods at vadodara. Further, he submits that even though the CENVAT credit availed on such activity has been reversed however, penalty is rightly confirmed under Rule 15 (2) of CCR, 2004, readwith Section 11 AC of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on service tax paid on services for shifting of the machineries at Chennai, is rightly denied and accordingly its recovery with interest and penalty confirmed by the authorities below is upheld. However, they are eligible to avail the benefit of discharging 25% of the penalty on fulfilment of the conditions laid down under the relevant provisions, namely, Rule 15(2) of CCR, 2004 readwith Section 1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
