Cenvat credit recovery under Rule 14 requires actual utilisation of wrongly taken credit; mere double entry is insufficient.

Recovery under Rule 14 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 is attracted only when wrongly taken credit has also been utilised, or where credit has been erroneously refunded. A double reflection of Cenvat credit in returns, without evidence that the disputed credit was actually used, does not satisfy the statutory condition for recovery with interest. On the record, the excess entry was treated as a mistake and no utilisation was found. The demand was therefore not sustainable and was set aside in favour of the assessee.

---

---

Issues: Whether Cenvat credit that was shown twice in the returns, but not shown to have been utilised, could be recovered under Rule 14 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004.

Analysis: Rule 14 permits recovery where Cenvat credit has been taken and utilised wrongly, or has been erroneously refunded. The liability to recover credit, together with interest, is attracted only when the wrongly taken credit has also been utilised. On the record, the excess entry was a double reflection in the returns and the notice itself treated it as a mistake; there was no finding of actual utilisation of the disputed credit. In that situation, the statutory condition for recovery under Rule 14 was not satisfied.

Conclusion: The demand was not sustainable and is set aside in favour of the assessee.

Final Conclusion: The appeal succeeds because mere wrongful availment or book entry of credit, without utilisation, does not trigger recovery under Rule 14.

Ratio Decidendi: Recovery under Rule 14 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 arises only when wrongly taken credit has also been utilised, or where credit has been erroneously refunded.

---