TMI Blog2018 (2) TMI 1400X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Chandrapur Magnet Wires (P) Ltd. vs. CCE, Nagpur [1995 (12) TMI 72 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA]. It is seen from the record that in the revised return filed on 25.04.2015, the cenvat credit of ₹ 16,16,790/- paid on input services has been deleted. Further, the appellant vide their written submission dated 19.01.2018 has confirmed that they have further reversed the amount of ₹ 97,957/- alongwith the interest of ₹ 88,258/-. The net result of the revised return as well as the further payment is that the entire cenvat credit availed on input services have been reversed by the appellant. The appellant can be considered as not availed the cenvat credit of input services, ab initi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... paid on input services to the extent of ₹ 17,11,894/-. This was noticed by the internal audit team at the time of audit of the records, soon after such return was filed. The Department took the view that since the appellant has availed Cenvat Credit of the tax paid on services, the appellant will not be entitled to the benefit of the Notification No. 1/2011 ibid and proceeded to demand the Central Excise duty at full rate amounting to ₹ 5,06,94,097/- alongwith interest and penalty of an equal amount. Aggrieved by the impugned order, the present appeal has been filed. 3. With the above background, we heard Sh. Amit Jain, ld. Advocate for the appellant and Sh. M. R. Sharma, ld. AR for the Revenue. 4. Shri Amit Jain, ld. Cou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... itted that the duty demand is in order. 7. We have heard both sides and perused the record. The appellant, during the period under consideration has availed the benefit of concession duty under Notification No. 1/2011 dated 01.03.2011 (as amended) (Sl. No. 131). The benefit is available subject to the condition that no credit of duty on inputs or tax on input services has been taken under the provisions of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. During the course of audit of the record of the assessee, the departmental officers noticed, after scrutiny of the ST-3 return filed for the period October, 2014 to March, 2015 (filed on 17.04.2015) that the appellant has availed cenvat credit on input services. Revenue has taken the view that this is in viol ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Water (P) Ltd., vs. Union of India 2004 (174) ELT 422 (All.), the Hon ble High Court has observed as follows- 17. The question as to whether manufacturer can be treated as not having taken credit on the inputs used in the manufacture of final product, even though it was originally taken but subsequently reversed, has been decided by a five Member Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Franco Italian Company Pvt. Ltd. vs. CCE -2000 (120) ELT 792. The aforesaid five members Bench of the Tribunal after taking into account the ratio laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of Chandrapur Magnet Wire (P) Ltd. vs. CC, Nagpur -1996 (81) ELT 3 (SC) has held as under- 6. Drawing similar analogy we consider that subject to the reversal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
