9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (12) TMI 1310X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lear that the appellant themselves filed the revise return to regularize the amount. Thus, there is no material available of suppression of fact with intent to evade payment of duty under the Section11AC of the Act. It is consistently viewed by the Tribunal that to impose penalty under Section 11AC of the Act, it is required to establish the short levy of duty would arise by reasons of fraud, coll ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... #8377; 20,12,181/-, which they have reversed immediately after detection by themselves. The main contention of the Learned Advocate is that they have not utilized the credit and therefore no interest is payable. Further, there is no suppression of fact with intent to evade payment of duty and therefore, penalty equal amount of demand of Cenvat Credit under Rule 15(2)of the Cenvat Credit Rules 2004 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 15(2) of the Rules and Section 11AC of the Act is warranted. For the purpose of proper appreciation of the case, the relevant portion of the impugned order is reproduced below: The said amount of excess availed cenvat credit had been rectified in the revised ST3 return for the period of April 2008 to September 2008 filed on 28th January 2009, by way of not reflecting the closing balance fi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 77; 20,12,181/- has been transferred to the ER.1. I find that ₹ 20,12,161/- (Rs 19,72,727/- S.Tax + ₹ 39,454/- Edu. Cess) was taken by the appellant twice in the ER1 return as well as ST3 return for the period Sept. 2007 to January 2009. During the period the appellant had maintained the balance above ₹ 20,12,181/-in the cenvat account and hence there is no overdrawal. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... i Mills Ltd - 2014.300.ELT.499 (Tri.Del.) c) Bombay Dyeing Mfg Co Ld Vs CCE, Mumbai IV - 2007.215.ELT.433 (Tri.Mum) It is noticed that the appellant themselves paid the penalty of ₹ 2000/- for filing revised return under Section 70 of the Finance Act 1994. 5. In view of the above discussions, the impugned order is modified in so far as the demand of Cenvat Credit/duty alongwith ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
