2012 (7) TMI 114

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... vailed the totally inadmissible and irregular credit knowing fully that credit was not available - suppression of fact has been correctly invoked and demand has been correctly confirmed and penalties have been correctly imposed - appeal is rejected - E/1918 of 2010 - - - Dated:- 29-6-2012 - Mr. B.S.V. Murthy, J. For Appellant : Shri V. Kansara, Advocate For respondent : Shri S.K. Mall, AR Per : Mr. B.S.V. Murthy; The facts of the case, in brief are that the appellant during the period September 2004 to May 2005 had availed cenvat credit on ineligible inputs namely, Light Diesel Oil (LDO for short), amounting to Rs. 4,40,046/-. Proceedings were initiated which has culminated in confirmation of demand for the amount .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... sions which are listed below, to submit that the omission on their part cannot be called as suppression of facts and in cases like this, extended period cannot be invoked :- (a) Ador Fontech Limited 2010-TIOL-1122-CESTAT-MUM (b) Switch Gear Control Technics P. Ltd. 2009(240) ELT 78 (Tri.) (c) Rajkumar Forge Limited 2010(262) ELT 155 (Bom.) (d) NTR Foods Limited 2011-TIOL-696-HC-KAR-CX (e) Reliance Inds. Limited 2011-TIOL-636-CESTAT-AHM. (f) Rainbow Plastic Inds. 2011(274) ELT 577 (Tri. Ahmd.) (g) Medicaps Limited 2011 (24) STR 572 (Tri. Del.) (h) Medico Limited 2011 (274) ELT 463 (Tri. Ahmd.) 3. Learned AR on the other hand submits that ignorance of law can never be .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ant. 5. Coming to the submission that appellant was not required to submit details of credit availed on LDO in the form of invoices and returns also did nor require the details to be included and therefore, suppression of facts has not been proved, I find that this is not so. In this case, the appellant has clearly suppressed the fact that they were availing cenvat credit on an input which was specifically named in the definition of inputs and excluded from the list of inputs on which credit can be taken. When there is a specific exclusion on availment of input credit, the submission that there was no suppression of this fact just because there was no column in ER-1 or no specific requirement of intimating the department or submitting i .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X