9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (8) TMI 1449X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... A PVT LTD VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, SERVICE TAX AND CUSTOMS, BANGALORE [2017 (6) TMI 201 - CESTAT BANGALORE], where it was held that the appellant reversed the CENVAT credit on being pointed out by the audit party along with interest and also informed the department about the same before the issue of SCN. In such a situation, as per Sub-section (2B) of Section 11A, the adjudicating au ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ber 2010 to March 2015 to the tune of ₹ 398095/-. As per the provisions of Rule 3(5B) of the CENVAT Credit Rules the assessee was required to pay an amount of ₹ 46158/- being the CENVAT credit taken on the said non-moving consumable items. On being pointed the assessee reversed the same in the credit register on 15.10.2015. Notice dated 12.08.2016 issued demanding the reversal of the a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tted that they have made provision for showing the correct status of the company regarding inventory. He further submitted that reduction in the value of stock for income tax purpose does not amount to writing off the stock. Further, the appellants did not have any intent to evade payment of duty and the non-reversal does not amount to intention of evading duty. 4.1. The learned counsel further ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the other hand, the learned AR defended the impugned order. 6. After considering the submissions of both the parties and perusal of the material on record, I find that the appellants has reversed the amount before the issuance of SCN and therefore, the Department should not have issued the SCN itself. The ratio of decisions cited supra is squarely applicable in the present case and therefore, b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
