TMI Blog2018 (12) TMI 84X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d of Interest - Held that:- It is the mandate of provisions of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, the appellant is entitled to avail Cenvat credit after making payment of the invoice - thus, for the intervening period, the appellant is liable to pay interest. Penalty - Held that:- As the appellant had contravened the provision of Rule 4(7) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, in these circumstances, the appellant is liable to pay penalty of ₹ 2000/- in each case. Appeal allowed in part. - APPEAL NO. E/2961/2010-EX[DB], APPEAL NO. E/57006/2013-EX[DB] - FINAL ORDER NO.63457-63458/2018 - Dated:- 26-10-2018 - Mr. Ashok Jindal, Member (Judicial) And Mr. Anil G Shakkarwar, Member (Technical) For the Appellant(s): Sh. Hidayatullah, Sr. Ad ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed 3-5 times every month and total numbers of such violation was 147 times. Accordingly, two show cause notices (SCNs) dt. 14.05.2009 and dt. 08.03.2010 were issued demanding Cenvat credit amounting to ₹ 61,82,086/- for the period April 2007 to January 2009 and ₹ 9,67,704/- for the period February-March 2009 respectively and proposing penalty under Rule 15 of CCR, 2004 read with Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act. Both the SCNs were adjudicated and the Cenvat credit was disallowed along with interest in both cases. Equivalent penalty was imposed under Rule 15 of CCR, 2004 read with Rule 11AC of the Central Excise Act in respect of SCN dt. 14.05.2009. However, in respect of SCN dt. 08.03.2010, penalty of ₹ 75,000/- was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... x Court reported in 2007 (214) ELT A50 (SC). It was also contended that the judgment of jurisdictional High Court is binding on the Tribunal if there is conflict of various Hon ble High Court judgments on this issue. In this regard, he relied on the decision of Larger Bench of this Tribunal in the case of M/s J.K. Tyres vs. CCE 2016 (340) ELT 193 (Tri. LB). It was also contended that the judgment of Hon ble High Court of Punjab Haryana in the case of M/s Jagatjit Industries (supra) will prevail on CBEC Circular dt. 03.09.2009 as held by Hon ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Astik Dyestuff P. Ltd. vs. CCE 2014 (34) STR 814 (Guj.). On penalty, Ld. Advocate submits that the period involved is April 2007 to March 2009, when the law ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the case of M/s J.K. Tyres (supra) are on reversal of credit where demand on interest had been dropped, but the party had never reversed the credit in this case. He also relied on judgment of Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of M/s KCP Ltd 2013 (295) ELT 353 (SC) to argue that twin conditions for Cenvat credit were that the duty must have been paid on the raw material and the excise duty was levied on the final product. He further relied on the decision of Hon ble Chhattisgarh High Court in the case of CCE, Raipur vs. Vandana Vidyut Ltd 2016 (331) ELT 231 (Chhattisgarh) and decision of this Tribunal in the case of CCE, Delhi-I vs. Aero Club 2016 (44) STR 604 (Tri. Delhi). He also contended that since the credit is first take ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d as the appellant was not entitled to take Cenvat credit, therefore we hold that the appellant is liable to pay interest for the intervening period. 6.2 The reliance by the Ld. Counsel for the appellant that they have not utilized the Cenvat credit and the same was lying in their Cenvat credit account, the said argument is not acceptable in the facts and circumstances of the case, as it is the mandate of provisions of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, the appellant is entitled to avail Cenvat credit after making payment of the invoice. Therefore, we hold that for the intervening period, the appellant is liable to pay interest. 6.3 Further, we find that as the appellant had contravened the provision of Rule 4(7) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
