TMI Blog2017 (10) TMI 663X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he part of the assessee. Therefore, in view of such circumstances, the reduction of penalty to the extent of 25% of the wrongly utilized cenvat credit is not sustainable in law - appeal allowed - decided in favor of Revenue. - ST/20663/2017 - Final Order No. 22411 / 2017 - Dated:- 10-10-2017 - Shri S. S. Garg, Judicial Member Dr. J Harish For the Appellant None (written submission) For the Respondent ORDER Per S. S. Garg The present appeal is filed by the department against the impugned order dated 19.01.2017 passed by the Commissioner (A) whereby the Commissioner (A) has rejected the appeal of the assessee but reduced the penalty to 25% of the wrongly utilized Cenvat credit. 2. Briefly the facts of the present c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d penalty under Rule 15(1) of CCR, 2004 read with section 78(1)(e) of FA, 1994 was imposed by the Joint Commissioner vide his order-in-original dated 28.11.2014. 4. Aggrieved by the said order, the assessee preferred appeal before the Commissioner (A), Mysore and the Commissioner (A) vide his order-in-appeal dated 19.01.2017 has rejected the appeal of the assessee on merits. However, the penalty imposed under provisions of Rule 15(1) of CCR, 2004 was reduced to 25% of the amount of duty. 5. Aggrieved by the reduction in penalty to 25%, the revenue has filed the present appeal. 6. Heard the learned AR for the revenue. But none has appeared on behalf of the assessee inspite of the notice. Since the issue is in narrow compass, I proce ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 3 of the CCR, 2004 and the explanation attached to it and as per the explanation to the said rule, it has been specifically incorporated w.e.f. 01.07.2012 that cenvat credit cannot be used for payment of service tax on GTA as service recipient and if there is a violation of this rule, then, the assessee attracts penal action under Rule 15 of CCR, 2004 for payment of GTA services as service recipient. But despite that, the assessee utilized the credit for payment. Further, I also find that the Commissioner (A) has come to the conclusion that the assessee has deliberately violated the rule which calls for penal action and on the other hand by considering the financial difficulties, he has reduced the penalty to 25% without any legal reasoning ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
