TMI Blog2018 (11) TMI 1379X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s held that neither any penalty nor interest under Section 11AC and under Section 11AB respectively was payable by assessee when it has deposited disputed duty voluntarily before issuing of notice under Sections 11AC and 11AB. The imposition of penalty under 15(2) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 read with Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944 is set aside - payment of interest is also waived - appeal allowed in part. - Appeal No. E/78319/2018 - FO/76966/2018 - Dated:- 20-11-2018 - Shri P.K. Choudhary, Member (Judicial) Shri Ankit Kanodia, CA for the Appellant (s) Shri A.K. Biswas, Suptd.(AR) the Respondent (s) ORDER Per Shri P.K. Choudhary This appeal is listed for admission today. After hearing b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 678/-(Rupees one lakh two thousand six hundred and seventy eight) only on the assessee under Rule 15(2) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 read with Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944. However, I allow the benefit for payment of reduced penalty of 25% (Twenty five percent) of the duty amount to the assessee subject to fulfillment of the conditions as laid down in Section 11AC(1)(c ) of the Central Excise Act, 1944. 4. I order for appropriation of ₹ 1,02,678/- (Rupees one lakh two thousand six hundred and seventy eight) only already paid vide RG- 23A Pt II entry Sl.No.416 dt. 28.04.2015. Against the adjudication order, both the assessee and the Revenue were in appeal before the lower appellate authority and the ld. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e present case is regarding the payment of interest and imposition of penalty. It is the case of the appellant that ld. Adjudicating Authority accepted the fact that the appellant had reversed the amount of cenvat credit of ₹ 1,02,678/- before issuance of the show cause notice. He also observed that since sufficient balance was always lying in their cenvat account since the date of credit taken till the reversal of the same, he waived the payment of interest. However, penalty under Rule 15(2) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 read with Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944 was imposed. 7. I find that the issue is covered by the decision of the Hon ble High Court at Allahabad in the case of Commr. Of Cus. C.Ex., Noida vs. Su ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d vide judgment dated 7-5-2003, appeals are dismissed and judgment is reported in 2004 (163) E.L.T. A53 (S.C.). Thereafter, Madras High Court in Commissioner v. Kjon Engineering (P) Ltd., 2005 (67) RLT 157, Karnataka High Court in Commissioner, Central Excise, Mangalore v. Shree Krishna Pipe Industries, 2004 (165) E.L.T. 508, Bombay High Court in Commissioner of Central Excise-I v. Gaurav Mercantiles Ltd., 2005 (129) ECR 386 = 2005 (190) E.L.T. 11 (Bom.) and Rajasthan High Court in Union of India and Others v. T.P.L. Industries Ltd., 2007 (214) E.L.T. 506 , have taken the same view. 5. Confronted with the aforesaid authorities, learned Counsel for appellant could not dispute the above position and also neither could place a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
