TMI Blog2018 (7) TMI 774X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y mentioned in the said rule - provisions of Rule 14 ibid cannot be invoked for denial of CENVAT Credit to the appellants. Confiscation u/s 119 of the Customs Act, 1962 - redemption fine - Held that:- It is not the case of Revenue that the appellant had used any other goods to conceal the offending goods i.e. “scrap in pressed bundle or loose scraps”. Thus, confiscation of goods under Section 119 ibid is not proper and justified - redemption fine also not warranted. Penalty u/r 26 of CER - Held that:- The provisions of Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 are applicable in case of both the appellants herein for imposition of penalty inasmuch as wrong invoices were issued by them, facilitating of availment of ineligible Cenvat be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nvat Credit Rules, 2004, the goods covered under invoices were confiscated under Section 119 of the Customs Act, 1962, with option to redeem the same on payment of fine of ₹ 3,68,042/-. The said order also imposed penalties of ₹ 1,50,248/- each on the appellants No. 1 2 under Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002. On appeal against the said adjudication order, the learned Commissioner (Appeals) vide impugned order has upheld the adjudged demands confirmed against the appellants. Hence, these appeals were preferred before this Tribunal. 3. Learned Advocate appearing for the appellants submit that Rule 14 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 cannot be invoked against the registered dealer for denying the CENVAT Credit. Thus, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... this case, the appellant No.1 is not confirming to either of the persons/entity mentioned in the said rule. Thus, I am of the considered view that provisions of Rule 14 ibid cannot be invoked for denial of CENVAT Credit to the appellants. Accordingly, the impugned order upholding denial of CENVAT Credit is set aside. 6.1 Section 119 of the Customs Act, 1962 provides for confiscation of smuggled goods, when any other goods were used for concealing the same. It is not the case of Revenue that the appellant had used any other goods to conceal the offending goods i.e. scrap in pressed bundle or loose scraps . Thus, confiscation of goods under Section 119 ibid is not proper and justified and accordingly, imposition of redemption fine will n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
