TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2014 (7) TMI 739
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ntral Excise, Ahmedabad-I initiated the proceedings under the Central Excise Act, 1944 (hereinafter referred to as "Act") by issuing the showcause notice against the Company M/s. Doshion Ltd. and the respondents herein i.e. Pankaj Navnitlal Mehta, Authorized Signatory of the Company; Shri Chandresh C. Shah, General Manager (Accounts) and Shri Sanjay Patni , General Manager (Finance & Accounts) of the Company. By the aforesaid showcause notice the Company M/s. Doshion Ltd. was directed to show cause as to why the Cenvat Credit of service tax involved on input service amounting to Rs. 1,51,51,730/- ( Cenvat Credit of Service Tax Rs. 1,48,67,947/- Cenvat Credit of Education Cess Rs. 2,80,997/- Cenvat Credit of Secondary and Higher Education Ce....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....so passed an order that the cenvat credit of service tax involved on input service amounting to Rs. 1 ,07,07,142 /- availed and utilized is to be recovered from the Company under Rule 14 of CCR, 2004 read with Section 11A of the Act. The adjudicating authority also ordered recovery of service tax credit amounting to Rs. 43 ,159 /- pertaining to the service tax paid before September 2004 utilized towards payment of central excise duty by their manufacturing unit under Rule 14 of CCR, 2004 read with Section 11A of the Act. The adjudicating authority also directed for recovery of interest on the aforesaid ground at the prescribed rates from them under the provisions of section 11AB of the Act. The adjudicating authority also imposed penalty on....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... proposed question of law. "Whether the CESTAT is justified in setting aside the personal penalty under Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 imposed on the employees/Director though they had the knowledge that their employer viz. M/s. Doshion Ltd., Ahmedabad was availing inadmissible Cenvat Credit?" 3. We have heard Shri Yogesh Ravani , learned advocate appearing on behalf of the common appellant. At the outset it is required to be noted and it is not in dispute that against the impugned common judgment and order passed by the learned Tribunal more particularly against the judgment and order passed by the learned Tribunal in the case of Company, the Revenue had preferred Tax Appeal No.415/2013 before this Court and the Division Benc....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....g the penalty imposed against the Company under Section 11AC of the Act by the learned Tribunal, the learned Tribunal in the impugned judgment and order has observed in para 5 as under: "5. We have considered the submissions made by both sides. We find considerable force in the arguments advanced by the learned counsel. The registered office and Vatva office both are located in the same place and appellant has simply utilised the credit at Vatva instead of distributing it to various units. As submitted by the learned counsel, during the relevant period, there was no restriction for utilization of such credit without allocating proportionality to various units. The omission to take registration as an Input Service Distributor can at best be....