Abatement with CENVAT credit: Section 78 penalty not sustainable where credit was reversed with interest before dispute matured.

A taxpayer who availed abatement under Notification No. 01/2006-ST while also taking CENVAT credit was found to have breached the notification conditions by obtaining a double benefit. The proper consequence was denial of the abatement benefit, but penalty under Section 78 of the Finance Act was not sustainable because no show-cause notice had proposed denial of the exemption or abatement, the credit was voluntarily reversed with interest before the dispute matured, and there was no basis to treat the original credit availment as inherently irregular. The penalty enhancement was therefore unsupported.

---

---

Issues: Whether penalty under Section 78 of the Finance Act was sustainable when the assessee availed abatement under Notification No. 01/2006-ST and also took CENVAT credit, but later reversed the credit with interest.

Analysis: The assessee had obtained a double benefit by availing the notification abatement and simultaneously taking credit, and the conditions of the notification were therefore violated. However, the appropriate course was to deny the benefit under the notification. No show-cause notice had been issued proposing denial of the exemption or abatement benefit, and the assessee had voluntarily reversed the credit with interest before the dispute matured. In the absence of any provision showing that the original credit availment was itself irregular, the revisionary enhancement of penalty could not be supported.

Conclusion: Penalty under Section 78 of the Finance Act was not sustainable and the assessee succeeded.

---