2015 (2) TMI 555

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the Commissioner (Appeals) has been rejected as not maintainable and thereafter the order-in-original has been upheld. The appellant had availed CENVAT credit of Rs. 10,22,090/- during the period from June 2010 to March 2011 out of which Rs. 9,09,520/- was held as ineligible. Out of the tax liability of Rs. 17,44,092/- for the period from July 2010 to March 2011 they had utilized CENVAT credit of Rs. 7,57,237/- for payment of service tax. Show-cause notice was issued proposing to recover the irregularly availed CENAVT credit of Rs. 9,09,520/- realizing in confirmation of the demand of the amount plus interest and imposition of penalty also. The appellants filed an appeal against this decision and it is submitted by the consultant on behalf....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s regard. They cannot choose to file application in such haphazard and improper manner as and when they choose to do so, without observing the legal provisions in this regard which are binding on them. There is no explanation also on their part with proper basis urged for allowing the same, if permissible, in the given circumstances. They cannot be allowed to file application belatedly for waiver of the penalties imposed on them (involving long and unexplained lapse and gap of more then seven months) in such manner for consideration by this Authority. They cannot be allowed to profit from their own lapse and error. The provisions of Section 35F of the CEA are mandatory' if waiver application is not filed along with (simultaneously) the ....