Escorts Ltd Versus CGST C.C & C. E-Dehradun
Central Excise
2018 (8) TMI 478 – CESTAT NEW DELHI – TMI
CESTAT NEW DELHI – AT
Dated:- 8-8-2018
Appeal No. E/51664/2018-SMC – Final Order No. 52721/2018
Central Excise
HON'BLE MR. AJAY SHARMA, MEMBER (JUDICIAL)
For the Appellant : Mr. R.K. Hasija, Advocate.
For the Respondent : Mr. H.S. Saini, DR.
ORDER
Per : Ajay Sharma
1. The instant appeal has been filed from the impugned order dated 16/03/2018 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), Dehradun.
2. The issue involved in this appeal is whether the appellants are liable to pay interest and penalty on the wrongly availed Cenvat Credit amounting to Rs. 94,208/- despite the fact that much before the issuance of show cause notice they have reversed the same. This issue pertains to wrong availment of Cenvat Credit of Rs. 94,208/- on the basis of bill of entry dated 12/12/2013 which was in favour of the appellant's sister concern situated at the same address as that of the a
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
e Department and perused the record. The Ld. Counsel for the appellants submitted that the bill of entry in question was lended in there unit inadvertently and the Cenvat Credit on the same was taken unmindfully by the junior clerical staff entrusted to maintain the records in routine manner and no malafide or fraudulent intention can be attributed on the part of the appellants. He further submitted that there was no suppression, misstatement, collusion, fraud with intention to evade payment, and that had there been any malafide intention or otherwise then the appellants would not have paid the amount even before the issuance of show cause notice. He further submitted that although mistake is there but the same is not deliberate or willful to cause a loss to the Government Exchequer. He also submitted that the appellants had sufficient balance of Cenvat Credit in their account throughout the period of wrong availment and they did not utilised the wrongly availed credit.
5. The Ld. AR
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
reversed it before utilization, therefore, it amounts to non-taking of credit. I do not find that there was any intention on the part of the appellants in defrauding the Revenue in as much as the appellants have sufficient balance in their Cenvat Account for discharging the duty liability. Similar issue was raised before this Tribunal in the matter of E/51040/2017 titled as M/s Rallison Electricals Ltd. V/s CCE, Alwar, wherein this Tribunal vide Final Order No. 56815/2017 dated 30/08/2017 while relying upon the decision of the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka at Bangalore in the matter of CCE & ST, Bangalore V/s Bill Forge Pvt. Ltd. 2012 (26) STR 204 (kar.) has held that since the appellants therein was having sufficient balance in their Cenvat Credit account, therefore, the appellant is not liable to pay the interest. The relevant extract of the said order is as under:-
“5. Heard the parties. Considered the submissions.
Issue of Interest
It is a fact on record that the appellan
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =