2018 (11) TMI 739 – CESTAT CHENNAI – TMI – Penalty – it was alleged that appellants have availed CENVAT credit based on invoices issued by their head office as input service distributor without getting registered as ISD – Held that:- It is seen that they have reversed the credit much before issuance of the show cause notice. It is also submitted that the appellants had sufficient balance in their CENVAT account – penalty cannot sustain relying on the case of THE COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, MADURAI VERSUS M/S. STRATEGIC ENGINEERING (P) LTD. [2014 (11) TMI 89 – MADRAS HIGH COURT] – appeal allowed in part. – Appeal No. E/42092/2018 – Final Order No. 42882/2018 – Dated:- 14-11-2018 – Ms. Sulekha Beevi C.S., Member (Judicial) Ms. S. Sridevi
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
posing to disallow the credit and also for imposing penalty. After due process of law, the original authority confirmed the demand and imposed equal penalty, which was upheld by the Commissioner (Appeals). Hence this appeal. 2. On behalf of the appellant, ld. counsel Ms. S. Sridevi submitted that the appellants are not contesting the appeal on merits and is confining their argument to the equal penalty imposed. She submitted that the appellant had reversed the entire credit even before issuance of the show cause notice. The only violation alleged by the department is that the head office had distributed the credit without taking ISD registration. Since there is only one unit apart from the head office, the credit was distributed and therefo
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =