https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=357948 Penalty for irregular Cenvat credit on capital goods from a 100% EOU depended on whether suppression, wilful misstatement, or intent to evade was established, and whether the extended limitation period under Section 11A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 applied. One Member treated the excess credit as detected on departmental verification and found the reversal not voluntary, supporting extended limitation and penalty under Rule 13(2) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002 and Rule 15(2) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. The other Member viewed it as a computation error with voluntary intimation and reversal, finding no mala fide or suppression. The Members differed, and the matter was referred to a third Member without final adjudication on merits. en-us Wed, 21 Feb 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 03 Apr 2018 06:56:11 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=357948 Penalty for irregular Cenvat credit on capital goods from a 100% EOU depended on whether suppression, wilful misstatement, or intent to evade was established, and whether the extended limitation period under Section 11A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 applied. One Member treated the excess credit as detected on departmental verification and found the reversal not voluntary, supporting extended limitation and penalty under Rule 13(2) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002 and Rule 15(2) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. The other Member viewed it as a computation error with voluntary intimation and reversal, finding no mala fide or suppression. The Members differed, and the matter was referred to a third Member without final adjudication on merits. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 21 Feb 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=357948