9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (7) TMI 572X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on inputs and capital goods. On 14.10.2011, they reversed cenvat credit on input of Rs. 72,58,926/- lying in cenvat credit account vide debit entry Sl.No.1667 dt. 14.10.2011 and informed the department by letter dt. 19.10.2011. Subsequently, by letter dt. 16.7.2012, they informed the department that the said credit was adjusted to revenue expenditure in the Income tax return filed on 26.11.2011. 2. The adjudicating authority claimed interest for the period 1.4.2011 to 13.10.2011 under rule 14 of Cenvat Credit Rules on the ground that they have claimed revenue expenditure under Income Tax Act in March 2011. He has also imposed penalty of Rs. 1 lakh on the appellant. 3. The learned advocate on behalf of the applicant submi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... further relied upon Board's circular No.783/16/04-CX dated 28.4.2004 at paras 2 & 3. 5. After hearing both sides and on perusal of records, I find that there is no dispute that appellant availed cenvat credit of Rs. 72,80,926/- in the financial year 2010-11. They have also claimed revenue expenditure of the said amount in the income tax return in the financial year 2010-11. It was reversed only in the next financial year as on 14.10.2011. In this context, the Board's circular dt. 28.4.2004 is reproduced below :- "2. It has been brought to the notice of the Board that in certain commodities, where there is accumulated CENVAT credit either due to inverted duty structure i.e. less duty on f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... td. (supra) which is in the context of capital goods and is not applicable in the present case. The case of Honda SIEL Cars (supra), is in the context of Rule 57 R(8) of the erstwhile rules 1944 which would not be applicable in the present case. Prima facie, it appears that the applicant is not eligible to avail credit where they have taken benefit of revenue expenditure under the Income Tax Act. In this context, demand of interest under Rule 14 of CCR is prima facie justified. The contention of learned advocate that there is no specific provision for demand of interest on reversal of input credit for claiming income tax benefit will be examined at the time of appeal hearing at length. In view of that, the applicant is directed to make a pr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
