2018 (4) TMI 654

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. Appellant herein had availed CENVAT credit on common input services while manufacturing excisable and exempted goods. Appellant's records were audited and it was brought to their notice that they have to reverse CENVAT credit on the common input services attributable to the exempted goods manufactured and cleared as per the provisions of Rule 6(3) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. Appellant reversed the CENVAT credit attributable to the exempted goods along with interest. Show cause notice was issued for demand of an amount equivalent to 6% of the value of the exempted goods cleared from the appellant's factory on the ground that they have failed to maintain separate accounts for the input services ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e Tribunal is that the penalty imposed by the first appellate authority under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944 is not correct. He read out the provisions of Section 11AC and brings to the notice of the bench that identical issue was agitated before the Hon'ble High Court of Punjab   & Haryana in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Ludhiana v. Sangrur Agro Ltd [2010 (254) ELT 25 (P&H)], produces a copy of the same and submits that the penalty has been set aside. 5. Learned Authorised Representative, on the other hand, submits   that there is wrong availmnt of CENVAT credit of the service tax paid on common input service and accordingly, extended period has been correctly invoked, penalty is righ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ty for the said period." 7. It can be seen from the above reproduced findings of the first appellate authority, that the entire penalty has been imposed on the appellant under the provisions of Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944. I find that the Learned Counsel was correct in bring to my   notice the ratio of judgment of the Hon'ble Punjab and Haryna High Court in the case of Sangrur Agro Ltd (supra) wherein the Hon'ble High Court had an occasion to consider an identical issue and their Lordships had passed the following order: "The Revenue has filed this appeal impuging the orders (Annexures P-3 and P-4) passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) and by Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (f....