9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (4) TMI 897X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ehicle parts falling under Chapter 87 of Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. During the course of audit of their records for the period 2011-12 to 2012-13, it came to the notice of the Department that the Appellant had availed inadmissible CENVAT Credit of the on the services viz. Rent-a-cab, Outdoor Catering, Mediclaim Insurance, and Vehicle Insurance, amounting to Rs. 8,16,755/-. On being pointed out by the Audit, the Appellant reversed the entire disputed amount with interest on 31.08.2014. Later, they have availed suo-moto credit of the CENVAT Credit reversed on outdoor catering service of Rs. 4,77,791/- in January 2015. Show Cause Notices were issued to the Appellant, one on 17.07.2015 proposing denial of CENVAT Credit of Rs. 8,16,755/- a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... th the demand of credit on merit. It is her contention that in any case, penalty is not imposable in the circumstances when conflicting views were expressed on the admissibility of credit on outdoor catering service. 4. Per contra, the learned A.R. for the Revenue submits that initially the Appellant had availed inadmissible credit on outdoor catering service and reversed the same on being pointed out by the Department. First Show Cause Notice was issued for appropriation of amount paid by the Appellant. Since the Appellant has subsequently taken suo-moto credit, after initially reversing the credit, therefore, the second Show Cause Notice was issued for recovery of the suo-moto credit availed by them. It is his contention that both the pr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y, which is within normal period of limitation. Simultaneously, I do not find merit in the impugned order, imposing equivalent penalty on the same amount of credit twice while adjudicating the Show Cause Notice dt.17.07.2015 and second Show Cause Notice dt.11.01.2015. In view of the conflicting views of the Tribunal during the relevant period on the issue of admissibility of CENVAT Credit of Service Tax paid on outdoor catering service post 01.04.2011, penalty equal to the credit availed, in my opinion, is unwarranted. In the result, the Appellants are not eligible to avail CENVAT Credit of Service Tax paid on outdoor catering service and required to reverse the same with interest as applicable; however, no penalty is attracted. Consequentl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
