2014 (11) TMI 657

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... up and consequently, this was missed out. We are satisfied with the reasons given for condonation of delay and accordingly, the delay is condoned. 2. There is a total demand of Rs. 5,20,09,346/- being the credit of service tax paid by distributors of SIM cards on commission received during the period from April 2006 to March 2011. On this issue, we find that the same issue had come up before this Tribunal and the Tribunal vide Final order No. 21330/2014 dated 13.8.2014, had taken a view that credit is admissible, in paragraph 7 of the order which is reproduced herein below :             7. In view of the above, the issue as to whether the appellant is eligible for Cenvat credit on in....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....n of the Tribunal and apply the same to the facts of the case and pass an order. 4.1. The next demand is for interest on 50% of credit taken in the year 2006-07. This demand has arisen on the ground that the appellant took entire amount of 100% Cenvat credit on capital goods instead of taking only 50%. It was submitted by learned counsel that even though they had taken 100% credit, the same was not at all used during the year and carried forward to the next year. However, in the absence of any record to show that their claim is correct, and absence of details of Cenvat credit, we consider that this claim is required to be considered by the original adjudicating authority. 4.2. This was opposed by learned A.R. on the ground that in view of....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....of Madras in case of Strategic Engineering (P) Ltd. [2014-TIOL-466-HC-MAD-CX] is the only decision that has been rendered after amendment of Rule 14 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 and is the only decision which takes into account the amendment also while arriving at the conclusion. The observations of Honble High Court in paragraphs 5 to 12 are relevant and are reproduced herein below : 5. The short point involved in the present Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is as to whether a mere taken of CENVAT credit facilities without actually using it, would carry interest as well as penalty? 6. The Appellate Tribunal has come to a definite conclusion to the effect that in the instant case the assessee has merely taken CENVAT credit facilities and be....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ngalore Vs. Bill Forge Private Limited) - 2011-TIOL-799-HC-KAR-CX 10. In fact, this Court has perused the entire decision reported in 2012 (26) S.T.R. 204 (Karnataka) (Commissioner of Central Excise & S.T Bangalore Vs. Bill Forge Private Limited) -(2011-TIOL-799-HC-KAR-CX) and ultimately found that mere taken of CENVAT credit facilities is not at all sufficient for claiming of interest as well as penalty. 11. It is an admitted fact that Rule 14 of the Cenvat Credit Rules has been subsequently amended, wherein it has been clearly stated as taken and utilised. Therefore it is quite clear the mere taking itself would not compel the assessee to pay interest as well as penalty. Further, as pointed out earlier, the subsequent amendment has give....