9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (8) TMI 1176X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the conditions of notification. Benefit of abatement allowed - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - Appeal No. ST/583/2010-DB - Final Order No. A/11766 / 2018 - Dated:- 10-8-2018 - Hon ble Mr. Ramesh Nair, Member ( Judicial ) And Hon ble Mr. Raju, Member ( Technical ) Shri Shailesh Vyas, Advocate for the Appellant Shri T. K. Sikdar, Assistant Commissioner ( AR ) for the Respondent ORDER Per : Ramesh Nair The brief facts of the case are that, appellant are engaged in providing the services of Commercial or Industrial Construction service. They have availed abatement under Notification No. 01/2006-ST dated 01.03.2006 and at the same time they availed Cenvat credit in respect of some input services f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... de their reply dt.19.11.2007 have submitted that due to ignorance of law, they had committed mistake in availing input credit, but after knowing the provisions of law, they have paid the total CENVAT Credit availed along with interest. The assessee further submitted that there was no malafide intention to evade payment of Service Tax and they requested to drop the proceedings initiated in the show cause notice. I find that M/s Pujan Builders, 84, Narriarayan Bunglows, B/H MIPCO, Narmada Nagar, Bharuch has contravened the provisions of Section 68 and 70 of Finance Act, 1994 and Rule 6 and Rule 7 of Service Tax Rules, 1994 without any prima facie intention to evade payment of Service Tax. Further, they had contravened the provisions of N ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... P) Limited vs. CCE Nagpur T 1996 (181) ELT 3 (SC). The Tribunal in the case of Leotronics Scales Pvt. Ltd. Vs CCE Chandigarh - 2015-TIOL-642-CESTAT- DEL, after following the decision of Hon ble Supreme Court, allowed the appeal on this issue. The relevant portion of the said decision is reproduced below: 10. As regard the second issue, both sides have relied on the judgments including the Supreme Courts judgment. We have considered all the judgments. In the case of Amrit Paper, the facts were that the manufacturer had availed the credit at the time of clearance of the goods and had suo-motu reversed/availed exemption later on almost after 15 months when it claimed refund of MODVAT Credit. In the case of Eagle Flask, it was held that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... learned Advocate submits that they have paid the interest on an amount of credit availed from the date of availment upto the date of reversal of credit. We find that the present case is squarely covered by the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the Tribunal. 7. In view of the above, we set aside the impugned order passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise and restore the order passed by the Joint Commissioner (Preventive), Vadodara. The appeal filed by the Appellant is allowed. Since, on the identical set of facts, as per the above judgment, the tribunal allowed the appeal, we respectfully following the ratio of the above order, set-aside the impugned order and allow the appeal. ( Order dictated and pronounced in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
