9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (10) TMI 758X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Commission is perfectly legal. Further, Rule 57E is not applicable. We find that the Counter Veiling duty was paid by the assessee in August, 2002 and the certificate was issued on 6th August, 2002 by the DRI. The Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002 came into existence with effect from 1st March, 2002 and, consequently, the Cenvat Credit Rules became applicable. We are of the opinion that Rule 57E of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 is not applicable in the instant case. With regard to imposition of penalty for contravening the provision of Rule 57E(3), (4) and (5) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 and Rule 7(1)(b) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002, the Settlement Commission granted full immunity to the assessee for levy of penalty or fine under th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... licant is ₹ 1,25,62,941/- as accepted by them in their application. This liability has also been fully paid. The duty liability includes the additional duty of Customs (CVD) payable on the goods of the applicant. In respect of the amount representing the CVD, the DRI shall issue a certificate in proof of payment thereof so as to enable the applicant to claim the benefit of MODVAT credit in accordance with law. (ii) Both the applicants are granted full immunity from prosecution for offences under the Act read with the relevant provisions of the IPC in respect of the matters covered by the applications in question. (iii) Both the applicants are granted full immunity from levy of penalty and fine under the Act in respect of the mat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... roof of payment made by the assessee, so as to enable the assessee to claim the benefit of MODVAT credit in accordance with law. The Commission also granted immunity to the assessee from levy of penalty under the Act as well as immunity from levy of tax under the Act. Pursuant to the order of the Commission, the Counter Veiling duty was paid by the assessee in August, 2002 and a certificate was obtained from the DRI on 6th August, 2002. The certificate indicated proof of payment of customs duty including Counter Veiling duty by the assessee. Pursuant to the certificate, the assessee wrote a letter dated 23rd August, 2002 to the Commissioner of Central Excise, Noida indicating that the assessee would be availing credit of additional Counter ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pondent as well as on Mr. Krishan Gupta, Ex-Managing Director and Mr. Akhilesh Kulshreshth (Authorised Signatory) for contravening the provisions of Rule 57E(3), (4) (5) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 and Rule 7(1)(b) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002? We have heard Sri Amit Mahajan, the learned counsel for the appellant-department and Sri M.P. Devnath and Sri Nishant Mishra, the learned counsel for the respondent. Sri Amit Mahajan, the learned counsel for the department contended that the certificate issued by the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI) cannot be taken into consideration, inasmuch as the certificate is required to be issued by the Superintendent of Central Excise under Rule 57E(4) of the Central Excise Rules, 19744 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
