9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (2) TMI 138X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... le assembly and chassis etc. It was noticed that they availed input credit in MS Excel Worksheet; the value of each input invoice document was entered manually and the eligible credit was worked out from the assessable value by a formula incorporated in the column of Excel sheet. The procedures involved in the availment of credit have been ascertained and input details were obtained in softcopy. On detail verification, it revealed that the appellants have availed excess input credit. Show cause notice was issued proposing to recover the wrongly availed credit along with interest and also for imposing penalty. After due process of law, the original authority confirmed the demand and appropriated the amount already reversed by the appellant. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 5. The appellant is confining the contest to the demand of interest and the penalties imposed. It is not disputed that the appellant has reversed the credit before utilization. The jurisdictional High Court in the decision relied by the ld. counsel has analyzed the very same issue and held that the demand of interest and the penalties cannot sustain. The relevant portion of the judgment is as follows:- "8. The entire argument put forth on the side of the appellant/Department is based upon the decision reported in 2012 (25) S.T.R. 184 (S.C.) = 2011 (265) E.L.T. 3 (S.C.) (Union of India v. Ind-Swift Laboratories Limited), wherein the Apex Court has given a finding to the effect that in Rule 14 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 it has been clea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n befitting answer to all doubts existed earlier. Since, the subsequent amendment has cleared all doubts existed earlier in respect of Rule 14 of the said Rules, it is needless to say that the argument advanced by the learned counsel appearing for the appellant/Department is erroneous, whereas the argument advanced on the side of the respondent is really having merit and the substantial questions of law settled in the present Civil Miscellaneous Appeal are not having substance and altogether the present Civil Miscellaneous Appeal deserves to be dismissed." 6. Following the above, we are of the view that the demand of interest and penalty cannot legally sustained. The impugned order is modified to the extent of setting aside the demand of i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
