2024 (6) TMI 389 - AT - Central Excise

Denial of CENVAT Credit with interest and penalty - HELD THAT - Undisputedly, these proceedings have arisen in the demand notice issue relying upon the grounds stated in earlier show cause notice dated 30.01.2015. Those proceedings has been culminated by the above referred order of the Tribunal in favour of the appellants 2018 (12) TMI 363 - CESTAT ALLAHABAD as no further ground is raised, there are no merits in the impugned orders. Appeal allowed.

Summary

Issues:
1. Disallowance of CENVAT credit and penalties imposed on the appellant.
2. Adjudication of demand notice issued based on earlier show cause notice.
3. Appeal against the Order-in-Original No.KNP-EXCUS-000-COM-018-15-16.
4. Tribunal's decision on the denial of CENVAT credit and penalties imposed.

Analysis:
1. The judgment pertains to the disallowance of CENVAT credit amounting to Rs. 34,52,475/- wrongly availed by the appellant, leading to penalties and interest charges. The Order-in-Original dated 06.01.2016 upheld the disallowance and imposed penalties under relevant provisions of the Central Excise Act, 1944 and CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. The Commissioner (Appeals) upheld this order, resulting in the appeal before the Tribunal. The Tribunal considered the impugned orders, submissions, and arguments made during the proceedings.

2. The demand notice issued on 18.03.2015 was adjudicated in the Order-in-Original No.04/CE/ADC/2016 dated 06.01.2016, where the CENVAT credit was disallowed, demand confirmed, interest imposed, and penalties levied on the appellant. The appellant's appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) was dismissed, leading to the present appeal. The Tribunal reviewed the earlier proceedings and the grounds of the show cause notice to make its decision.

3. The Order-in-Original No.KNP-EXCUS-000-COM-018-15-16 dated 29.10.2015 denied CENVAT credit amounting to Rs. 4,48,81,193/- wrongly availed by the appellant, along with interest charges and penalties. The appellant challenged this order before the Tribunal, which set aside the Commissioner's order based on the appellant's explanation and relevant legal provisions. The Tribunal's decision highlighted the commercial arrangement between the appellant and another entity for financial control and management.

4. The Tribunal's decision in the present proceedings was influenced by its earlier ruling in a similar case involving the same appellant. The Tribunal found no justifiable reasons to deviate from its previous decision, leading to the setting aside of the impugned order and allowing the appeals with consequential relief to the appellants. The judgment was pronounced on 04 June 2024, concluding the legal proceedings in favor of the appellants.