TMI Blog2017 (12) TMI 1492X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... terest and penalty set aside - relying in the case of Commissioner Vs. Bill Forge (P) Ltd. [2011 (4) TMI 969 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT], where it was held that if the CENVAT credit is availed but not utilised and is reversed then the assessee is not liable to pay interest. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - E/20485/2014-SM - 22935/2017 - Dated:- 4-12-2017 - Shri S.S Garg, Judicial Member Shri Prinsun Philip, Advocate, For the Appellant Shri N. Jagadish, Superintendent(AR), For the Respondent ORDER Per: SS Garg The present appeal is directed against the impugned order dt. 31/10/2013 passed by the Commissioner whereby the Commissioner has dropped the demand of ₹ 88,91,251/- but confirmed the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 92,81,091/- from the month of November 2011 to March 2012. The assessee had taken and availed the cenvat credit without taking into consideration that the definition of input service as given in Rule 2(l) of the CCR, and had thus violated Rule 3 read with Rule 2(I). 2.3. On the above allegations, a show-cause notice dt. 07/09/2012 was issued to the appellant proposing to disallow the ineligible credit taken by them to the tune of ₹ 92,81,091/- along with interest and also proposed penalty under Rule 15. After considering the submissions of the parties, the learned Commissioner dropped the demand of ₹ 88,91,251/- but confirmed the demand of ₹ 3,89,840/- and appropriated the amount of ₹ 3,76,462/- which was reverse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ter reversing the credit, the account has substantial amount of ₹ 50,13,232/- as balance in the account. He further submitted that the appellant reversed the credit availed suo moto immediately after the show-cause notice was received and well before the order was passed by the adjudicating authority. He further submitted that the levy of interest and imposition of penalty is wrong when the appellant has not utilised the CENVAT credit and they have only availed in their books of accounts. He further submitted that the appellant is a state government undertaking and it is settled position in law that allegation of fraud, collusion and suppression cannot be alleged against government undertakings. In support of his submission, he reli ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... find that they have also produced a statement of their CENVAT account which has substantial amount of credit of as balance which shows that they have only availed the CENVAT credit and not utilised the same and subsequently reversed. Moreover, I find that the appellants are a state government undertaking and allegation of fraud and suppression cannot be alleged against government undertaking. The decisions relied upon by the learned AR are not applicable in the facts and circumstances of this case whereas the decision of the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka in the case of Commissioner Vs. Bill Forge (P) Ltd. [2012(26) STR 204 (Kar.)] is applicable where the High Court has held that if the CENVAT credit is availed but not utilised and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
