TMI Blog2020 (2) TMI 38X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nterest has indeed been demanded under Rule 14 of CCR 2004. Merely because they have also not mentioned Rule 6(3A) in the Show Cause Notice, it does not vitiate the entire demand of interest. The first appellate authority has given the appellant adequate opportunity to explain as to why they are not liable to be paid interest - appeal dismissed - decided against appellant. - Service Tax Appeal No. 30246 of 2019 - A/30004/2020 - Dated:- 2-1-2020 - HON BLE MR. P. VENKATA SUBBA RAO, MEMBER (TECHNICAL) None for the appellant Shri V.R. Pawan Kumar, Superintenden./AR for the Respondent. ORDER PER: MR. P. VENKATA SUBBA RAO 1. This appeal is filed against Order-in-Appeal No. HYD-EXCUS-MD-AP-2-0113-18-19-ST, date ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... issued to the appellant seeking to deny them the CENVAT Credit of ₹ 11,25,660/- under Rule 6(3) of CCR 2004 and recover the same under Rule 14 of CCR 2004, read with proviso to Section 73(1) of the Finance Act, 1994. It was also proposed that the amount which has already been debited by the appellant be appropriated against the demand. Further, it was proposed to recover interest under Rule 14 of CCR 2004 on the above amount and impose penalty under Rule 15(3) of CCR 2004 read with Section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994. After following due process, the original authority confirmed the demands as proposed and appropriated the amount already paid by the appellant. He also ordered recovery of interest as proposed and imposed a penalty. On ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... demand has been made invoking Rule 14 and not Rule 6(3A) clause (e). 7. Ld. DR submits that even if there was a slight error in mentioning the correct clause in the show cause notice, it does not vitiate the imposition of demands in it. He relies on the case law of Indian Plywood Manufacturing Company Limited [2018(11)GSTL 309 (Tri.-Bangalore)]. Therefore, not mentioning Rule 6(3A) Clause (e) along with Rule 14 does not nullify the imposition of interest. His second line of argument is that even if Rule 6(3A) clause (e) is specifically invoked, by virtue of Explanation-III of this sub rule, the recovery has necessarily to be made under Rule 14 which is exactly what has been invoked in the show cause notice. He would further submit that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ioner 2004(167) E.L.T. A134 (S.C.) upheld the Tribunal s findings that non-mention of particular Section of Customs Act will not vitiate the proceedings when allegations and charges were mentioned in clear terms in show cause notice. A similar view was taken at para 10.3 of the ruling in the case of JAGSON INTERNATIONAL LTD. versus COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, CHENNAI [2006(199)ELT 553 (Tri.-Del.)] para 10 of the ruling in the case of AVI STEEL TRADERS versus COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE (2010(260)ELT 43 (Del.); and para 17.6 of the ruling in the case of SIDHHARTH SHANKAR ROY versus COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, MUMBAI [2013(291) ELT 244 (Tri.-Mumbai)]. The relevant provisions of Customs Act examined in these rulings are in pari materia with tho ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ge 15 ibidem. The quantification of interest under clause (e) of Rule 6(3A) has been inserted at Para 13 of the OIA dated 31.07.2017 and held payable, as an independent discussion on the existence of the interest liability embedded in clause (e) of Rule 6(3A), forming part of amount payable under that rule, meriting recovery in toto under Rule 14 routed through Explanation-III to Rule 6(3D) post 01.04.2011 which was earlier Explanation-III to Rule 6(3) itself prior to 01.04.2011. This dichotomy was misunderstood as a self contradiction by the appellant in his plea before the Hon. Tribunal. Be that as it may, the matter has been considered by me in totality during the instant (remand) proceedings, as recorded supra. The appellant s relianc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 188507 30.06.2013 07.07.2015 737 91351 2013-14 280994 30.06.2014 07.07.2015 372 68732 2014-15 130503 30.06.2015 07.07.2015 7 601 TOTAL 1125660 541574 8. After considering the grounds of appeal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
