2015 (12) TMI 1310
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r the Respondent : Shri P M Dave, Advocate, Shri P P Jadeja, Advocate & Shri Paritosh Gupta, Advocate ORDER Per : Mr.P.K. Das, The Learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the appellant submits that they are not contesting the demand of the Cenvat Credit of Rs. 20,12,181/-, which they have reversed immediately after detection by themselves. The main contention of the Learned Advocate is th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., they are not seriously disputing the demand of interest. 3. After hearing both the sides and on perusal of records, I find that the dispute in the present appeal, relates to, as to whether the imposition of penalty of equal amount of Cenvat Credit under Rule 15(2) of the Rules and Section 11AC of the Act is warranted. For the purpose of proper appreciation of the case, the relevant portion of....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 25th October 2008) on payment of penalty of Rs. 2000/- in cash vide Challan, for late filing of the return. I find that the closing balance was Rs. 40,21,011/-(Rs 39,27,024/- S.Tax + Rs. 93,987/- Edu. Cess), the remaining amount after rectification of Rs. 20,12,181/- has been transferred to the ER.1. I find that Rs. 20,12,161/- (Rs 19,72,727/- S.Tax + Rs. 39,454/- Edu. Cess) was taken by....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ent or suppression of fact with intent to evade payment of duty.. The Learned Advocate relied upon the following decisions: a) Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd vs. CCE, Chandigarh -2012.26.STR.183 (Tri.Del.) b) CCE, Allahabad Vs Balrampur Chini Mills Ltd - 2014.300.ELT.499 (Tri.Del.) c) Bombay Dyeing & Mfg Co Ld Vs CCE, Mumbai IV - 2007.215.ELT.433 (Tri.Mum) It is noticed tha....
TaxTMI