2014 (2) TMI 592

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....llant defaulted in payment of excise duty and default continued for more than 30 days; therefore, as per the provisions of Rule 8 (3A) of the Central Excise Rules, 2002, the appellant was required to discharge excise duty liability on the subsequent clearances without utilizing any Cenvat Credit and paying duty through PLA. However, during the impugned period the appellant utilised Cenvat Credit to the extent of Rs. 3,15,54,953/-, therefore a show-cause notice dated 16/5/2012 was issued proposing to deny Cenvat Credit of Rs.3.15 crore availed by the appellant during the impugned period and seeking to recover the same. The said notice was adjudicated upon by the impugned order and a duty demand of Rs.3.15 crore was confirmed and the amount o....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e upto 31/03/2012, had been taken into account and in respect of clearances made between 26/03/2012 and 31/03/2012 there is no bar in the appellant availing the Cenvat Credit if this is taken into account the demand would come down by Rs.15 lakhs approximately and therefore, the correct amount they should have been confirmed by the appellant is only Rs.2.22 crore and not Rs.2.37 crores as confirmed in the impugned order. 4. The Ld. Commissioner(AR) appearing for the Revenue on the other hand submits that the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka in the case of Manjunatha Industries Vs. CCE, Banglore held that prohibition under Rule 8(3A) of Central Excise Rules, 2002 from utilizing Cenvat Credit account is not with reference to arrears but to th....