TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (9) TMI 779
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....-Cus. dated 28.2.1999. The said notification allows concessional rate of duty of 5% on imported kerosene provided that 15% is used for extraction of normal paraffin. The remaining 85% is subjected to standard rate of duty. The appellants also used indigenous kerosene procured from M/s. CPCL. As kerosene from both the sources are stored in the same storage tank, with the permission of the department, certain dispute arose which is the subject matter of this appeal. The appellant after extraction of normal paraffin from the imported kerosene returned the kerosene after such process, to M/s. CPCL. Initially at the time of procurement of kerosene, they have taken CENVAT credit on the central excise duty / CVD paid on the same. The dispute in th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rage of both imported and indigenous kerosene in the same storage facility and method of clearance to M/s. CPCL. There can be no case of suppression, fraud or collusion etc. in the present proceedings. She accordingly prayed for waiver of penalty as they have reversed the credit even before issue of show cause notice. 4. The ld. AR opposes the submission of the appellant. He submitted that the appellants were fully aware of the provisions of CENVAT Credit Rules. They have availed credit on kerosene and have not reversed the said credit when the kerosene was cleared as such to M/s. CPCL. There is no ambiguity in the provision regarding liability of the appellant. The question of bonafide belief of law has no application in the present case.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....processed kerosene to M/s. CPCL without payment of duty in violation of the CENVAT credit rules punishable under proviso to the said Rules." 7. Against the above submission, the contention of the appellant is that they themselves had certain difficulty in quantifying the imported kerosene cleared to M/s. CPCL. This is because of mixed storage in a common facility. In such situation, they cannot be penalized. We note that the common storage permission is a concession granted by the Revenue which will involve the responsibility of accounting attributing to two mixed products separately. That responsibility is fastened on the appellant on their request. Admittedly, they have not followed the procedure at the time of clearance of a portion of ....