9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (8) TMI 226X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was specified. The fact that Cenvat credit was taken on "erection, installation and commissioning service" was not disclosed to the Department. Section 11AB of the Central Excise Act was correctly invoked in this case wherein Cenvat credit was wrongly availed of and utilized for payment of duty of excise on final product thereby creating a situation of short-payment of duty of excise on final product. It was the short-paid duty which was paid by the assessee before show-cause notice but without interest. This interest has been paid by the assessee after the impugned order was passed and the same is interest on duty of excise, which cannot be demanded under section 75 of the Finance Act, 1994. The correct provision of law governing this ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the aforesaid period, they paid service tax with education cess on the erection, installation and commissioning of conveyors at customers premises, apart from payment of duty of excise on the said goods. The Cenvat credit taken on the said service was utilized for payment of duty of excise on the conveyors manufactured and supplied to customers and installed at their premises. This irregularity was detected by the Department on verification of records of the appellant. The aforesaid show-cause notice was issued on completion of investigations and the same invoked the extended period of limitation on the alleged ground of suppression of facts by the party. Before the issue of the show-cause, the party had paid-up an amount equal to the Cen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fide intention and hence paid up the duty as soon as the mistake was pointed out by the investigating officers. There was no suppression of facts by the appellant who filed periodical returns stating therein the Cenvat credits availed of on input services. In these circumstances, according to the appellant, the penalty imposed on them is liable to be set aside. The learned Superintendent (Authorised Representative) submits that the appellant, having been registered with the Department as a provider of erection, installation and commissioning service , could not have assumed for a moment that the said service was an input service. The plea of bona fide belief is, therefore, not sustainable. Though, in their periodical returns, the amount ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
