9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (12) TMI 328X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ellant. In these circumstances, the benefit of Section 80 of the Finance Act is to be given to the appellant and therefore, penalty on this count for ₹ 7,18,001/- is set aside. Further, for availment of inadmissible Cenvat credit of ₹ 23,71,100/-, I find that appellant is entitled to take Cenvat credit only up to 20% of Cenvat credit. In the case of Service Tax for outward exempted service, it is the admission of the appellant that they are not maintaining separate accounts. Therefore, they are not entitled to take Cenvat credit more than 20%. Further I find that if the audit had not been conducted in the premise of the appellant, this fact would not have come in the knowledge of the department, therefore, I hold that on these c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ce Act and for violation of Cenvat Credit Rules. The appellant is not disputing their liability of Service Tax along with interest. They are only contesting the imposition of penalty on the premise that as they have paid the entire Service Tax along with interest on pointing out by the department. Therefore show cause notice was not required to be issued as per Section 73(3) of Finance Act, 1994. 3. The contention of the learned Consultant for the appellant is that as the appellant has committed bona fide mistake, as in the case of demand of Service Tax of ₹ 7,18,001, in some cases appellant has paid excess amount of Service Tax and in some cases, short payment. Therefore, it was inadvertent mistake committed by the appellant and t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... credit of ₹ 23,71,100/-, I find that appellant is entitled to take Cenvat credit only up to 20% of Cenvat credit. In the case of Service Tax for outward exempted service, it is the admission of the appellant that they are not maintaining separate accounts. Therefore, they are not entitled to take Cenvat credit more than 20%. Further I find that if the audit had not been conducted in the premise of the appellant, this fact would not have come in the knowledge of the department, therefore, I hold that on these count, appellant is liable to be penalized. 7. As appellant has paid entire amount of Service Tax along with interest before issuance of show cause notice, therefore penalties are restricted to 25% of the Service Tax involved. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
