9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (7) TMI 255X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... arju Mehta, Chartered Accountant for the Appellant Shri R.K.Agarwal, Superintendent (AR) for the Respondent ORDER RAMESH NAIR In this appeals penalty under Rule 26 of Central Excise Rules, 2002 was imposed for a charged of issuing Cenvat Credit invoices in favour of M\s Nakoda Alloya Pvt. Ltd. Without supplying the goods for fraudulent passing of Cenvat credit. 2. Shri, Sarju Mehta, Learned C ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pertains to the period prior to 01.04.2007 no penalty can be imposed. He placed reliance on the following judgments: Commissioner of C. Ex. Chandigarh Vs. Anshul Steel Scrap Corpn. 2011(264) E.L.T. 535 (Tri.- Del.) Dhakad Metal Corporation Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.& S.T. Daman 2015(330) E.L.T. 561 (Tri.- Ahmd.) Duggar fiber Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex. & S.T., Delhi 2015(322) E. L.T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... got their case settled under Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019 and the same has been affirmed by this Tribunal vide order dated 01.02.2007. As regard the present appellants, they have issued invoices as per the case of the department and they have not supplied the goods and only on proper transaction the fraudulent Cenvat credit was passed on to Nakoda Alloys Pvt. Ltd. 4.2 I ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed view for all the transactions made prior to 01.04.2007 the Penal Provision Rule 26(2) cannot be applied retrospectively. Therefore, in respect of the transactions only made after 01.04.2007 the penalty under Rule 26(2) of Central Excise Rules, 2002 shall be applicable. This issue has been considered in the judgments cited by Learned Chartered Accountant. 4.4 Accordingly, in the appeals of M/s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
