9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (11) TMI 782X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... credit - Held that:-Following Union of India Vs. Ind-Swift Laboratories Ltd. [2011 (2) TMI 6 - Supreme Court] - The manufacturer of the provider of the output service becomes liable to pay interest along with the duty where CENVAT credit has been taken or utilized wrongly or has been erroneously refunded and the provision of Section 11AB would apply for effecting such recovery - The word ‘OR’ found in Rule 14 cannot be read as ‘AND’. The assessee’s contention that they did not utilize this credit towards payment of duty cannot be accepted when there were clearances of final products and duty has been debited from the credit account cannot be accepted - during the period, the liability to pay duty/service tax would have arisen any number ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Adjudicating authority confirmed the demand. Commissioner (Appeals) relying on the Board Circular No. 897/17/2009-CX dated 3/9/2009 upheld the irder-in-original passed by the adjudicating authority. Being aggrieved by the Commissioner (Appeals) order this appeal has been filed. 3. The Ld. Advocate appearing for the appellant has stated that the appellant had taken the credit twice against one and the same invoice inadvertently and after detection of the mistake reversed voluntarily the said excess credit of Rs.22,52,527/-.It is the contention that the appellant during the relevant period had sufficient credit balance in his accounts, so they never utilized the wrongly availed credit. He cited in his support the judgement of the Hon ble H ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d and the benefit of exemption was extended. He reiterated the judgement of the Hon ble High Court of Punjab Haryana in case of CCE Delhi-III Vs. Maruti Udyog Ltd. reported in 2007 (214) ELT 173 (P H) , wherein it was held that the assessee had only made an entry in the records and actually not taken or utilized such credit, the question of payment of any interest would not arise. 4. Per contra, the Ld. A.R. appearing for Revenue has contended that in view of the Board Circular 8/97/70/2009-CX dated 3/9/2009 and the judgement of the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India Vs. Ind-Swift Laboratories Ltd. -2011 (265) ELT 3 (SC), the appellant was required to pay interest from the date of taking irregular/excess credit till the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... able to pay interest along with the duty where CENVAT credit has been taken or utilized wrongly or has been erroneously refunded and that in the case of the aforesaid nature the provision of Section 11AB would apply for effecting such recovery. The Court further pronounced that the word OR found in Rule 14 cannot be read as AND . 10. As regards the reliance placed by the Ld. Advocate for the appellant on the Bill Forge Pvt. Ltd., case cited supra, the facts are distinguishable. In that case the credit wrongly taken was reversed before the liability to pay duty arose and, therefore, it was held that without the liability to pay duty, the liability to pay interest would not arise and liability to pay interest would arise only when the du ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
