2013 (11) TMI 1017

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....re of 'Air Pollution Control Equipment' falling under Tariff Sub-heading No.8421 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. During October, 2006, the Appellant had availed cenvat credit against four input invoices issued by suppliers, namely, M/s Pennar Industries Ltd., M/s Ador Powertron Ltd., & M/s International Combustion (India) Ltd. In the said invoices, the Appellant's name as well as consignees name and place of delivery had been shown. The place of delivery is the place, where the Appellants were installing Air Pollution Control Equipment. However, even though, the inputs were not received in their factory but delivered at site, the Appellant had erronerously availed cenvat credit on the same. A show-cause notice was issued to them fo....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....they have availed cenvat credit at their factory in Kolkata. Later on, when the demand was issued to them for recovery of the said amount, the entire amount of cenvat credit along with interest have been paid. Shri Sinha also submitted that since the Appellant is an SSI Unit, they are not fully conversant with the Central Excise Law and Procedure, for which, the said mistake had occurred on their part. Further, he has submitted that even though, in the show-cause notice, a penalty has been proposed under Rule 15 (1) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, however, the Adjudicating Authority has wrongly imposed penalty under Rule 15 (2) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 read with Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944. In support, he has referred to ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... be liable to a penalty not exceeding the duty or service tax on such goods or services, as the case may be, or two thousand rupees, whichever is greater. Further, I find that while confirming the demand in the adjudication proceedings, the Adjudicating Authority has imposed penalty under Rule 15 (2) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. The Rule 15 (2) of Central Credit Rules, 2004 is as follows :              15 (2) a case, where the CENVAT credit in respect of input or?(2) capital goods or input services has been taken or utilised wrongly by reason of fraud, collusion or any wilful mis-statement or suppression of facts, or contravention of any of the provisions of the Excise A....