Penalty under Section 78 cannot stand when reversed credit is paid back with interest before notice and no intent to evade is shown

Penalty under Section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994 could not be sustained where wrongly availed CENVAT credit was reversed with interest before the show-cause notice and the record showed no fraud, suppression, collusion, wilful misstatement, or intent to evade tax. In the absence of material establishing culpable conduct, the legal basis for penal action failed, and the remand for quantification of penalty was not supported. The assessee therefore obtained relief, with the penalty determination set aside.

---

---

Issues: Whether penalty under Section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994 could be sustained when the disputed credit was reversed with interest before issuance of notice and there was no evidence of fraud, suppression, collusion, wilful misstatement, or intent to evade tax.

Analysis: The dispute concerned reversal of ineligible CENVAT credit along with applicable interest before the show-cause notice. The record did not show any material indicating deliberate evasion or suppression of facts with intent to evade payment of tax. In such circumstances, the foundation for invoking penal consequences under Section 78 was absent. The remand for quantification of penalty was therefore not supported by law.

Conclusion: Penalty under Section 78 was not sustainable, and the remand for determination of penalty was set aside in favour of the assessee.

Final Conclusion: The appeal succeeded and the impugned order was set aside, granting consequential relief.

Ratio Decidendi: Where wrongly availed credit is reversed with interest before notice and the Revenue fails to prove intent to evade or other culpable conduct, penalty under Section 78 cannot be imposed.

---