2019 (1) TMI 903 – CESTAT NEW DELHI – TMI – CENVAT Credit – input services – services used in the employee hostel and other repairs and maintenance in the plant – Held that:- Major part of the credit relates to repair and maintenance which is definitely admissible as cenvat credit and is not excludible under the exclusion clause Rule 2(l) for the purpose of civil construction – credit allowed.
–
Validity of SCN – invocation of extended period of limitation – Held that:- From the allegations in the show cause notice it is evident that the appellant had maintained proper records, filed timely returns no case of concealment or contumacious conduct is made out – the extended period of limitation is not invocable – penalty also set aside – appeal allowed – decided in favor of appellant. – Appeal No. E/53187/2018-SMC – A/53503/2018-SM[BR] – Dated:- 11-12-2018 – Shri Anil Choudhary, Member (Judicial) Shri Prabhat Kumar, Advocate for the Appellant Shri P.R. Gupta & S. Nunthutk, AR for
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
hs earlier only. 3. Show Cause Notice dated 4th May, 2017 was issued invoking the extended period of limitation alleging as follows:- 5. Had the fact of availment of inadmissible cenvat credit not been detected by the Audit Team of Central Excise audit circle Satna, the irregularity would have gone unnoticed. The Noticee had not submitted any documents or information, such as copies of relevant Invoices/Abstract/Statement of Cenvat Credit taken by them etc. to the department for taking such credit. They had also not mentioned the facts of taking such wrong Cenvat Credit in their retuns/reports filed by them. It is also pertinent to mention here that the Noticee are registered with Central Excise Department since long and they are aware of the Rules/Sections/ Notifications/ Laws & Procedures of the Department. In spite of that they had taken inadmissible Cenvat Credit, which was not admissible to them. The Noticee are working under Self Removal Procedure and they are clearing their
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
the inadmissible input services appears liable to be recovered along with interest under rule 14 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 read with Section 11A and 11AA of the Central Excise Act, 1944. Further, the notice, by taking the said inadmissible cenvat credit and utilising the same for payment of excise duty have contravened the provisions of rule 2,3,4 & 9 of the Cenvat Credit Rules and rendered themselves for punishment under rule 15 of the Cenvat Credit Rules read with Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944. 4. The show cause notice was adjudicated on contest and the proposed demand confirmed and adjusted the amount of pre-deposit already made further interest was demanded and also penalty was imposed of equal amount under Rule 15 (2) of CCR, 2004. 5. Being aggrieved the appellant preferred appeal before Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) who have been pleased to hold that there is no applicability of interest as the amount have not been utilized following the ruling of Hon ble
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =