9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (8) TMI 453X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... credit on the outward transportation incurred beyond the place of removal. Accordingly, the appellant-assessee is liable to reverse the credit of CENVAT credit taken, if any, along with interest thereon during the impugned period During the material period, as per the decision of the Larger Bench in the case of ABB Ltd. case [2009 (5) TMI 48 - CESTAT, BANGALORE], the appellant was held to be eligible for the credit which decision was reversed by the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court for the period after 1-4-2008 vide the judgment cited (2011 (1) TMI 748 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT). Therefore, the assessee cannot be alleged to have committed either suppression or fraud in the matter and therefore, imposition of equivalent of penalty on the assesse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e same were confirmed against the appellant along with interest thereon. The appellant was also imposed with equivalent amount of penalties. The appellant preferred appeals before the lower appellate authority who dismissed their appeals and hence, the appellant is before me. 4. The learned Counsel for the appellant submits that the expenditure has been incurred in respect of outward transportation of the goods after their removal from the factory. The learned Advocate also submits that the cost of transportation also does not form part of the assessable value of the goods cleared. However, he fairly concedes that after the decision of the Hon ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise v. ABB Ltd. as reported ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... April, 2010 to March, 2011. The judgment of the Karnataka High Court in the case of ABB Ltd. (supra) came out only in January, 2011. Therefore, during the material period, as per the decision of the Larger Bench in the case of ABB Ltd. case (supra), the appellant was held to be eligible for the credit which decision was reversed by the Hon ble Karnataka High Court for the period after 1-4-2008 vide the judgment cited (supra). Therefore, the assessee cannot be alleged to have committed either suppression or fraud in the matter and therefore, imposition of equivalent of penalty on the assessee is totally unwarranted. Accordingly, I set aside the penalty imposed on the appellant. However the assessee is directed to reverse the CENVAT credit t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
