2015 (5) TMI 994

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ices received in the factory for use in the intended purpose. During the disputed period, the appellant reversed the cenvat credit taken on capital goods, for which no interest was paid for delayed reversal of such credit. Non-payment of interest was objected to by the Department and the Show Cause proceedings initiated in this regard was culminated in the adjudication order, wherein the interest liability was confirmed against the appellant. According to the Central Excise Department, once the irregular credit has been taken which was subsequently reversed, such reversal calls for payment of interest. Views taken by the Adjudicating Authority for payment of interest was upheld by the Commissioner (Appeals) vide the impugned order, against ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... by limitation of time having been issued beyond one year from the relevant date. To vindicate his above stand, the Ld. Advocate has cited the following judgments/ decisions rendered in the case of CCE Noida vs Accurate Chemical Industries reported in 2014 (310) ELT 441 (All.), CCE Kolkata- VI vs ITC Ltd. reported in 2013 (209) ELT 377 (Tri. Del) and CCE vs Chemphar Drugs & Liniments reported in 1989 (40) ELT 276 (SC). 3. Per contra, the Ld. DR appearing for the Revenue submits that once the cenvat credit taken has been reversed, the assessee is statutorily required to pay the interest during the period between taking of such irregular credit and subsequent reversal thereof. With regard to the limitation aspect, the submission of the Ld.....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s within the prescribed time limit. Eligibility of the disputed goods to cenvat credit either under the head 'capital goods' or 'input' is not under dispute in view of the fact that the eligibility aspect has not been discussed either in the adjudication order or in the impugned order. Since, the eligibility to cenvat credit is not under dispute and there is no specific records prescribed for taking credit on inputs and, or capital goods, the credit taken on both the category of goods are eligible for credit for utilization towards the clearance of the final product from the factory. Hence, it cannot be said that the appellant has wrongly taken the disputed cenvat credit, for which Rule 14 of the Cenvat credit Rules, 2004 re....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e extended period cannot be invoked for the reason that SCN has not been issued within time limit of one year. In other words, where the Department had the knowledge about the facts of the case, period of issuance of SCN should be confined to one year and the five year period cannot be invoked, since the same has the application in rarest of the rare occasion, involving element of fraud, collusion or willful misstatement or suppression of facts, or contravention of the Central Excise Act or of the Rules made there under with intent to evade payment of duty. I also find that the Tribunal in the case of ITC ltd. (Supra) has held that since, the ER-1 Return has been filed, the Revenue could not invoke the extended period of limitation on the g....