Subscription   Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Articles Highlights TMI Notes SMS News Newsletters Calendar Imp. Links Database Experts Contact us More....
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

M/s. Rallison Electricals Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Alwar

2017 (10) TMI 496 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

Demand of interest - CENVAT credit taken wrongly - appellant has immediately reversed the CENVAT credit excess taken by them - Rule 3(7)(a) of CCR, 2004 - Held that: - It is a fact on record that the appellant was having sufficient balance in their 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

Held that: - the appellant immediately reversed the CENVAT credit excess availed by them on pointing out by the department. Therefore, in that circumstances, malafide cannot be attributable against the appellant and no proceedings were required to be .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

R K Hasija, Advocate for the Appellants Ms Kannu Verma Kumar, DR for the Respondent ORDER Per: Ashok Jindal The appellant is in appeal against the impugned order and praying for waiver of demand and interest and penalty imposed by them. 2. Brief fac .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

, 2004. Therefore, appellant has immediately reversed the cenvat credit excess taken by them. Later on, the show cause notice was issued for appropriation of said amount and to demand interest and to impose penalty. The matter was adjudicated and amo .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

appellant was having sufficient balance in their cenvat credit account. Therefore, the demand of interest is not sustainable in the light of decision of Hon ble Karnataka High Court decision in Bill Forge Pvt. Ltd. [2012 (26) STR 204 (Kar)]. He furth .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

appellant under section 11(2B) of the Central Excise Act, 1944. 4. On the other hand, learned AR opposed the contention of the learned Counsel and submits that the ignorance of law is no excuse. Therefore, the appellant is required to be penalized. .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

e case of Bill Forge (supra), the appellant is not liable to pay the interest. Therefore, the demand of interest made in impugned order is set aside. Imposition of penalty. In this case, the appellant immediately reversed the cenvat credit excess ava .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

what is new what is new
  ↓     bird's eye view     ↓  


|| 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