9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (2) TMI 350X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Central Excise duty. They did not reverse the said credit on their own accord but only after being pointing out by the departmental officers and hence they appear liable for penal action. On perusal of the said allegation in the show-cause notice, the credit has been taken intentionally and wrongly. Both are contrary terms. If the credit is taken intentionally then it cannot be taken wrongly but i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rief facts of the case are that the respondent procured capital goods in the year 2001-02. In the said year, they availed 50% of CENVAT Credit of duty paid capital goods. Remaining 50% credit was taken in the year 2002-03. The respondent again took 50% in 2003-04. Audit took place in the factory of the respondent and on pointing out by the audit party they reversed the CENVAT credit availed on the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Mills - 2009 (238) ELT 3 (S.C.). Therefore, the impugned order is to be set aside and penalty under Section 11AC is to be confirmed against the respondent. 5. On the other hand the learned Consultant on behalf of the respondent has taken the credit wrongly but on pointing out they immediately reverse the same and paid interest for the intervening period. Therefore, the extended period of limita ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... credit has been taken intentionally and wrongly. Both are contrary terms. If the credit is taken intentionally then it cannot be taken wrongly but if it is mentioned wrongly then it cannot be intentionally. When the show-cause notice alleges two contrary terms against the respondent in that situation, benefit of doubts goes in favour of the respondent. As show-cause notice has not alleged the res ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
