Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2017 (11) TMI AT This

  • Login
  • Cases Cited
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2017 (11) TMI 824 - AT - Central Excise


Issues:
1. Whether the appellant is required to pay interest for availing credit during a specific period.
2. Whether the demand issued for recovery is barred by limitation.

Analysis:

Issue 1:
The appellant, engaged in manufacturing Gutkha and Pan Masala, challenged the levy introduced under the Compounded Levy Scheme. They availed cenvat credit on inputs but did not utilize it for discharging duty as they were debarred from doing so. The appellant argued that the credit availed was for record purposes only, anticipating a favorable outcome from the challenge. The Revenue contended that since the credit was availed in their books, interest is due. The Tribunal found that the appellant was debarred from utilizing the credit and had reversed it before the demand was issued, making the recovery of interest unsustainable. The judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in a similar case was cited, supporting the appellant's position. The recovery of interest was deemed not applicable, and the demand was considered barred by limitation, leading to the appeal being allowed.

Issue 2:
The Revenue argued that the appellant wrongly availed and later reversed the credit, justifying the imposition of interest and penalty. They contended that the appellant's case was distinct from previous judgments. The Tribunal noted that the appellant was debarred from utilizing cenvat credit and had reversed the credit before the demand was issued. The Tribunal found that the recovery of interest and penalty was not justified, as the appellant's actions were in line with the legal provisions applicable to their case. The judgment cited by the Revenue was deemed not directly applicable to the present circumstances. The Tribunal held that the penalties imposed were not valid, and the recovery of interest was unwarranted. The appeal was allowed in favor of the appellant.

In conclusion, the Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, setting aside the impugned order and allowing the appeal with any consequential relief as per the law. The judgment was pronounced in open court on 31.10.2017.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates