TMI Blog2021 (8) TMI 170X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... utilization. This issue is no more res integra and has been settled by the Karnataka High Court in the case of COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE SERVICE TAX LARGE TAXPAYER UNIT, BANGALORE VERSUS M/S BILL FORGE PVT LTD, BANGALORE [ 2011 (4) TMI 969 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT] where it was held that Once the entry was reversed, it is as if that the Cenvat credit was not available. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - Central Excise Appeal No. 22431 of 2015 - Final Order No. 20650/2021 - Dated:- 3-8-2021 - MR. S.S GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER Ms Sudeshna Banerjee, Advocate for the Appellant Mr. K.B. Nanaiah, Assistant Commissioner (AR) for the Respondent ORDER The present appeal is directed against the impugn ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mand of irregular cenvat credit along with interest and also imposed penalty. Aggrieved by the same, the appellant filed appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) who rejected the appeal. Hence, the present appeal. 3. Heard both the parties and perused the records. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant submitted that the impugned order is not sustainable in law as the same has been passed without properly appreciating the facts and the law and the binding judicial precedent. She further submitted that the appellants have reversed the cenvat credit of ₹ 18,13,932/- (Rupees Eighteen Lakhs Thirteen Thousand Nine Hundred and Thirty Two only) in December 2007 and ₹ 20,73,284/- (Rupees Twenty Lakhs Seventy Three Thousand ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... osition of penalty in the following cases: M/s. BEML Ltd. V. CCE, Bangalore-I vide Final Order No. 20865/2017 dated 10.04.2017 M/s. BEML Ltd. V. CCE, Bangalore-I 2016-TIOL-3157-CEST AT-BANG. M/s. BEML Ltd. V. CCE, Bangalore-I vide Final Order No. 21405-06/2015 dated 29.05.2015 M/s. BEML Ltd. V. CCE, Bangalore-I 2015-TIOL-2566-CESTAT-BANG. M/s. BEML Ltd. V. CCE, Bangalore-I 2015-TIOL-2802-CESTAT-BANG. 4.1. She also submitted that there was no malafide intention on the part of the appellant and the appellant immediately reversed the credit based on the objection raised by the Department. She also submitted that the entire demand is time-barred and extended period of limitation could not have been inv ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... LTU, Bangalore V. Bill Forge Pvt. Ltd. cited supra and thereafter consistently being followed by the Tribunal in the case of J.K. Tyre Industries Ltd. - Larger Bench. Further I find that in the appellant s own case it has been consistently held in various decisions cited supra wherein this Tribunal by following the decision of Bill Forge, Strategic Engineering and J.K. Tyre Industries Ltd. has consistently set aside the demand of interest and imposition of penalty. Hence, by following the ratios of the said decision, I am of the considered view that the impugned order is not sustainable in law and I set aside the same by allowing the appeal of the appellant. (Operative portion of the order was pronounced in the Open Court on 03/08/2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
