9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (1) TMI 252X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that the appellant is engaged in providing taxable as well as exempted services but has availed cenvat credit of common input services without maintaining a separate account for input services credit for exempted as well as taxable services during the period 2013-14. It was alleged that the appellants in their ST-3 Returns also have not disclosed the correct taxable value and have not paid service tax amounting to Rs. 42,65,412/- i.e. equivalent to 6% on the value of the exempted services. Resultantly, a Show Cause Notice No. 654 dated 23.03.2015 was served upon the appellant proposing the recovery of the aforesaid amount alongwith the interest at the appropriate rate and the proportionate penalties. The said recovery has been confirmed ini ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... posed when the amount of cenvat credit availed has been reversed alongwith the interest even before the issuance of the Show Cause Notice. No doubt the appellant herein was engaged in manufacture of dutiable as well as exempted final products. In accordance of Rule 6(2) of Cenvat Credit Rules, the appellant was supposed to maintain the separate accounts for inputs for manufacture of dutiable as well as exempted (trading) final products. However, in case of not so maintaining, the appellant has two options: Either to take the cenvat credit and pay amount equal to 6% of value of exempted goods (w.e.f. 01.04.2012) as per Rule 6(3)(i) CCR, 2004 Or to take entire credit and pay an amount equal to proportionate cenvat credit attributable to exe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Krishna Cylinder 2015 (1) TMI 1197 has held that in accordance of the provisions of Section 73(3) of the Finance Act, the Show Cause Notice was not required to be issued when service tax along with interest has been paid by the assessee before the issuance of the Show Cause Notice. Further, in the Show Cause Notice there were no specific allegations of non-payment due to fraud, collusion, wilful mis-statement or suppression of material facts, it was held that no penalty can be imposed on such assessee. The facts in the present case are identical. Hence I adjudicate the aforesaid controversy in favour of the appellant holding that penalty cannot be imposed when the amount of tax/ wrongly availed credit has been paid alongwith the interest be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
