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>Tribunal allows appeal, reverses cenvat credit decision, deems penalty notice time-barred, and sets aside impugned order.</h1> <h3>M/s Panihati Rubber Limited Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Kolkata III</h3> M/s Panihati Rubber Limited Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Kolkata III - TMI Issues involved: The issue involved in this case is regarding the reversal of cenvat credit while opting for SSI exemption and the subsequent demand of cenvat credit and penalty imposed on the appellant.Details of the Judgment:1. Facts of the Case: The appellant, engaged in the manufacture of rubber products, availed the benefit of SSI exemption during the period from 31.03.2000 to 31.03.2004. Upon crossing the exemption limit, the appellant started paying duty and availing modvat/cenvat credit on inputs.2. Reversal of Cenvat Credit: The appellant failed to take cenvat credit on inputs when coming out of the SSI exemption and did not reverse the credit on inputs when opting for the SSI exemption benefit again. This led to the appellant becoming liable for payment of duty on multiple occasions.3. Show-Cause Notice and Limitation: A show-cause notice was issued on 18.07.2006 for recovery of cenvat credit and penalty. The appellant contended that the notice was barred by limitation as they had rectified their mistake by reversing the cenvat credit on 28.07.2005 after being pointed out by the Audit.4. Decision of the Tribunal: The Tribunal found that the appellant had rectified the discrepancy regarding the reversal of cenvat credit upon being pointed out by the Audit. As the appellant had already reversed the cenvat credit along with interest, the Tribunal held that there was no requirement to issue the show-cause notice.5. Conclusion: The Tribunal set aside the impugned order, allowing the appeal by confirming the reversal of cenvat credit by the appellant and the payment of interest for the intervening period. The proceeding against the appellant was deemed not sustainable, and the appeal was allowed.Therefore, the appellant succeeded in the appeal, and the impugned order demanding cenvat credit and penalty was set aside.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
