2019 (2) TMI 1033

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Rs. 1,21,60,874/- during the month of April as 50% of duty paid on capital goods on which 100% credit was already taken by 2008-09. Though on being pointed out the said availed credit was reversed from the credit balance of the appellant in the month of March 2010 itself but the Department vide SCN No. 793 dated 27.05.2013 on the ground that the impugned cenvat credit availed was not admissible to the appellant in terms of Rule 4(2a) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 (hereinafter referred to CCR) and as such was proposed recoverable alongwith the interest. The appropriation of the cenvat credit of Rs. 21,60,874/- in addition, the interest amounting to Rs. 15,80,913/- on the aforesaid amount was also proposed alongwith the penalty in view of Rul....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....being beyond the prescribed period. The Order therefore has no infirmity. Appeal is prayed to be dismissed. 4. After hearing both the parties, we observe that the cenvat credit of Rs. 1,21,60,874/- is acknowledged to have been wrongly availed by the appellant. It is also the admitted fact that the moment this inadvertence in the books of accounts of the appellant was brought to their notice that they reversed the amount in excess from their credit balance in the month of March 2010 itself. It therefore becomes the revenue neutral situation as far as the books of accounts of the appellant are concerned and since the stage of taking or utilising the credit had not yet come, there is no occasion for revenue to suffer any loss on this accoun....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....on record) the appellant is conveying that in the month of April 2009, the cenvat credit was inadvertently availed and that the same stands reversed in the month of March 2010 itself. The Commissioner (Appeals) is therefore opined to have ignored the true spirit of the provisions and even the intimation sent to the Department by the appellant. Apparently present is not the case of imposition of interest. We draw our support from the decision of Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka in the case of C.C.E., Bangalore Vs. Pearl Insulation Ltd. 2012 (281) E.L.T. 192 (Kar.) wherein it was held where the assessee has not taken or utilised the credit but has only availed a wrong credit in their books of accounts and on pointing out the mistake as immedia....