9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (12) TMI 1247X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... - matter may be sent to the adjudicating authority for verification of the re-quantification done by the appellant. Penalty u/r 15 of CCR - Held that: - It is admitted that appellant have availed wrong credit as provision of Rule 6(1) is very explicit and there is no confusion that the Cenvat credit in respect of input used in the exempted goods is not available - there is clear contravention of the Rule 6(1) - penalty upheld. Appeal allowed in part by way of remand. - E/259/08, E/371/09 - A/91165-91166/17 - Dated:- 30-11-2017 - Mr. Ramesh Nair, Member (Judicial) And Mr. Raju, Member (Technical) Ms. Anjali Hirawat, Advocate for the Appellants Shri. V. K. Agarwal, Addl. Dy. Commissioner(A.R.) for the Respondent ORDE ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cture of exempted fertilizers was not admissible to them and was required to be recovered under Rule 6(1) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. The adjudicating authority confirmed the demand of both amount and also demanded interest in addition, also imposed penalties of ₹ 25 lacs and ₹ 15 Lacs. 2. Ms. Anjali Hirawat, Ld. Counsel for the appellant does not dispute much on the demand of Cenvat credit, however she raised the issue of quantification of the demand. She submits that apart from Naphtha other inputs such as natural gas, furnace oil was also used for generation of steam. Accordingly, the Cenvat credit attributed to Naphtha will stand reduced. She also submitted a chart according to which for the period Nov, 2005 to Septembe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed. Accordingly, quantum of Naphtha against total generation of steam will stand reduced, however this being matter of fact, has to be verified. We are of the view that matter may be sent to the adjudicating authority for verification of the re-quantification done by the appellant and thereafter passed a denovo adjudication order. As regard the penalties, we find that penalties were imposed under Rule 15 of Cenvat Credit Rules, and not under Section 11AC. It is admitted that appellant have availed wrong credit as provision of Rule 6(1) is very explicit and there is no confusion that the Cenvat credit in respect of input used in the exempted goods is not available. Accordingly, despite clear provision under Rule 6(1), appellant have been ava ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
