TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Penalty for Rule 57G violation overturned by court after delay condonation and credit allowance.</h1> <h3>SRIRAM KAIYAUN MACHINE TOOLS LTD. Versus COMMR. OF C. EX., NEW DELHI</h3> The penalty imposed for alleged contravention of Rule 57G was set aside by the Court. The Court found that once the delay in filing the declaration was ... Modvat/Cenvat - Modvat on inputs - Declaration - Penalty - Evidence - Document Issues:- Modvat credit disallowance under Rule 57-I and penalty imposition under Rule 173Q for alleged contravention of Rule 57G.- Validity of the application for condonation of delay of Modvat declaration.- Justification for sustaining the penalty after the belated declaration was filed and acted upon by the Commissioner (Appeals).Analysis:1. The appellants took Modvat credit without filing a declaration under Rule 57G, resulting in a delay of 16 days. The Department proposed to disallow the credit and impose a penalty. The Dy. Commissioner disallowed the credit and imposed a penalty. The Commissioner (Appeals) allowed the credit but did not interfere with the penalty. The present appeal is against the penalty, with no cross objection or separate appeal by the Revenue.2. The Advocate for the appellants argued that once the belated declaration was filed and acted upon by the Commissioner (Appeals), there was no contravention of Rule 57G, hence no justification for the penalty. The JDR contended that no application for condonation of delay was submitted. The JDR insisted on upholding the penalty even after granting the Modvat credit.3. The J. examined the submissions and found the application for condonation of delay to be genuine. The document submitted by the assessee was accepted as a true copy of the application received by the Department. The Commissioner (Appeals) acknowledged the delay but allowed the credit, indicating acceptance after condonation of the delay. The J. concluded that once the delay was condoned and the credit allowed, there was no contravention of Rule 57G, thus no basis for sustaining the penalty. Consequently, the penalty was set aside, and the appeal was allowed.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
