2018 (7) TMI 243

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... for the Respondent ORDER Brief facts are that the appellants are manufacturers of computer and were availing CENVAT credit of duty paid on inputs and input services. On verification of their accounts, it was noticed that during the period 2007 - 08 and 2008 - 09 they have wrongly availed CENVAT credit of duty on input services twice on the same set of invoices. When it was pointed out, the appe .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... counsel Shri M.N. Bharathi submitted that the appellant is continuously maintaining CENVAT credit balance which is increasing year by year due to inverted duty structure. He submitted that the wrong availment of credit took place due to software system and internal control errors. He submitted that though the appellant wrongly availed the credit but has not utilized the same and the appellants we .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... nsel for the appellant wherein the Hon'ble High Court has observed that mere taking itself would not compel the assessee to pay interest as well as penalty. The relevant portion of the order is reproduced as under:- "11. It is an admitted fact that Rule 14 of the Cenvat Credit Rules has been subsequently amended, wherein it has been clearly stated as "taken and utilised". Therefore, it is quite c .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X