2017 (11) TMI 148

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... that the officers of the Anti Evasion Unit, Pune I commissionerate visited the unit and found that the assessee was availing inadmissible credit on inputs and capital goods.  It was observed that the assessee had been receiving certain capital goods from M/s. Bajaj Auto Limited, Pune on loan basis and the said goods were being utilised for the manufacture of their final products.  The values of the goods received free of cost was not being considered for amortization in the value of the final product.  Further discrepancies listed below were also noticed. i. Availment of 100% CENVAT credit against 50% on the capital goods. ii. Availment of CENVAT credit in excess of invoice amount. iii. Availment of credit on reject....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nancial year) due to oversight but the said credit was not utilised and reversed immediately after the same was being pointed out by the Department and therefore the question of imposing a penalty does not arise in view of Section 11A(2B) of the Central Excise Act, 1944.  In support of this submission, he relied upon the following decisions: i. Vilax Industrial Fabrics Vs. CCE, LTU, Bangalore [Final Order No.20645/2016 dt. 19/08/2016] ii. Kotsons Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CCE&ST, Jaipur-I [2016(333) ELT 456 (Tri. Del.)] 4.2.   He further submitted that even though the appellant has received some old unused machineries / capital goods from M/s. Bajaj Auto Ltd. on loan licence basis, the said goods have not been installed due to t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....[2014 (311) ELT 353 (Tri. Bang.)] iii. Kumar Organics Products Ltd. Vs. CCE, Bangalore [2014(307) ELT 774 (Tri. Bang.)] 5.   On the other hand learned AR reiterated the findings of impugned order. 6.   After considering the submissions of both the parties and perusal of the materials on records and the various decisions relied upon by the appellant cited supra, we find that the appellant has by oversight availed 100% of the credit on capital goods wherein the appellant was required to take only 50% in the first financial order and the remaining in the next financial year; but as soon as the Department pointed out this lapse, the duty was reversed along with interest.  In that kind of a situation, as per Sec....