9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (4) TMI 20X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ted amount immediately on being pointed out by the department. The amounts paid by the Appellant were as a result of Stay order dated 29.01.2010 passed by the First Appellate Authority as mentioned in paragraph-4 of the Order-in-Appeal dated 20.06.2012. However, there is substance in the argument made by the Appellant that all the relevant details with respect to dutiable and exempted goods were mentioned in the periodical returns filed with the department. On perusal of the records and in the interest of justice this Bench is of the view that a penalty of ₹ 20,000/- under Rule 13(1) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002 will meet the ends of justice. Accordingly penalty imposed upon the Appellant by the Adjudicating Authority under Order- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ovided under Cenvat Credit Rules which was amended in 2005 as per Section 82 of the Finance Act, 2005. (i) Commr. of C.Ex and S.Tax, LTU, Bangalore vs. Bharat Electronics Ltd. [2011(267)E.L.T.172(Kar.)] (ii) Commr. of C.Ex, Allahabad vs. J.H.V.Sugar Corp. Ltd.[2010(262)E.L.T.540(Tri.-Del.] (iii) Nibi Steels Ltd. vs. Commr. of C.Ex, Allahabad [2012(284) E.L.T. 734(Tri.-Del.) 3. Sri S.Mukhopadhyay, Suptd.(AR) appearing on behalf of the Revenue argued that retrospective amendment in the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2001 was only carried out in 2005 by Section 82 of the Finance Act, 2005. That provisions regarding recovery of Cenvat Credit under Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002 and 2004 were already existing and no retrospective amendment was car ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rectly highlighted by the Ld. A.R. that recovery machinery was existing in Rule 12 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002, from the very beginning and no retrospective amendment for introducing recovery machinery was done under Section 82 of the Finance Act, 2005. Accordingly, the case laws relied upon by the Appellant regarding non-imposition of penalty are not applicable. The period during which the Cenvat Credit was taken by the Appellant ranges from April, 2003 to July, 2004 when Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002 and 2004 were in operation. As per Rule 12 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002, recovery machinery for taking improper credit existed in Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002. The Appellant was further well aware of paying 8% of the amount under Rule 6 of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
