CLERICAL MISTAKE IN CENVAT UTILIZED FIGURE

[Guest]

In April 2013 while filing monthly return ER1 ,erroneously (clerical typing mistake), in place of 'cenvat credit utilized for payment of duty'column, we put figure of closing balance, resulting excess figure of Rs 153241 in utilization column. As we find out the mistake in first week of June 13 we rectify the mistake and inform the range superintendent and make correct figure in ER1 of june 13 and given a letter of such correction to supdt. as per their direction.

Now new supdt. is pointing out the mistake again.

please inform that in this case what will be aspects.

whether our procedure was right.

[PAWAN KUMAR]

Dear Sir,

Intimate the range superintendent in writing in details. Acknowledge the letter and attach a copy of all the return till the error resolved.

[Guest]

We already intimate the range superintendent in writing in june 13.

As erroneously we show excess payment of duty by cenvat, whether it is a matter of refund?

[PAWAN KUMAR]

Dear Sir,

As per my view, no such utilization has been done in excess. This is only an typographical mistake which you intimated to your RO. No need to file any refund as no utilization actually in the cenvat accounts i.e. Part II registers.

[Guest]

Thanks PAWAN Ji, you have given a considerable and justified point.

[Rakesh Chitkara]

In view of Ind Swift judgement of Supreme Court, please see whether there is an interest liability

[DR.MARIAPPAN GOVINDARAJAN]

The views of Rakesh Chitkara is also to be taken into account. Hello Sir Rakesh Chitkara! How are you?

[Guest]

we have shown excess payment in April 2013 ER-1 and make correction in June 2013 ER-1, during this period no short fall of cenvat in RG 23 part II. So how interest liability arise ?

[PAWAN KUMAR]

Dear Sir,

The mistake was made at the time of data filling into ER1. The closing balance mistakenly filled into utilization part. The same was also corrected during June'13 and entire fact was informed to department.

Now, how the interest will arise, if the payment has not done in the Cenvat account.

As per my view, Cenvat has not utilized during April'13, if Cenvat not utilized, question of interest does not arise.

[Rakesh Chitkara]

Obviously, you have not read IndSwift judgement.

Supdt. must have changed in the meantime. Go back to him with complete evidence. I endorse the method followed by you. But tell us what is the view of the Department.

[Guest]

New supdt. has to decided whether any need of issuance of show cause notice or it it is to be taken as a simple typing mistake.

I also has to study thoroughly Indswift judgment.

[Guest]

There has an error taken place in ER-1 only, RG 23 A P.II was going right ? If , it is o.k. then there has no question for interest , what I understood. If error was in RG 23 A P.II then it was major problem and you have to pay interest.

It is open that it is only typographical mistake in ER-1 only not in record (P.II).

This is my opinion. Yes, Rakeshji ?

Awaiting your valuable reply for our knowledge.

AI Summary

Clerical Error in ER-1 Return Corrected, No Excess Utilization; Review Ind Swift Judgment for Implications Suggested. A clerical error occurred in April 2013 when filing the ER-1 return, where the closing balance was mistakenly entered in the 'Cenvat credit utilized for payment of duty' column, leading to an excess figure of Rs 153,241. The mistake was corrected in June 2013, and the range superintendent was informed. A new superintendent has raised the issue again. Participants in the discussion suggest that since no actual excess utilization occurred, there is no need for a refund or interest liability. However, they recommend reviewing the Ind Swift Supreme Court judgment for any potential implications.