2019 (5) TMI 956

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ed inadmissible CENVAT Credit of Rs. 51,17,734/- during the relevant period from October 2006 to March 2007. On being pointed out by the Audit Team of the Department, they have reversed the inadmissible credit. Thereafter, a show cause notice was issued to them for recovery of interest of Rs. 8,07,972/- and imposition of penalty equivalent to the credit availed and proposed appropriation of the credit already reversed. On adjudication, the amount paid was appropriated and interest of Rs. 8,07,972/- was directed to be paid and penalty of equivalent amount imposed under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944 read with Rule 15 of CENVAT Credit Rules 2004. Hence, the present appeal. 3. At the outset, Learned Advocate for the appellant ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d that even if the credit wrongly availed but not utilized, interest is payable for the period prior to the amendment of the relevant provision. He has further submitted that the Larger Bench in the case of JK Tyre Vs. AC Mysore - 2016 (341) ELT 193 (Tri.-LB) answering the reference observed that the ratio laid down by the jurisdictional High Court would be binding on the Bench situated within the said jurisdiction of the concerned High Court. Further, he has submitted in view of the judgment of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise and Service Tax, Surat-II Vs. Atul Ltd. - 2017 (358) ELT 825 (Tri.-Ahmd.) interest is payable. 5. We have carefully considered the submissions of both sides. The short is....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....on'ble Judges of the Madras High Court, we may say that this is not what has been held by their Lordships of the Apex Court. The Apex Court has in clear terms held that the interpretation as paced by the Punjab and Haryana Court for invoking the provisions of Rule 14, there has to be taking as well as utilizing is not correct in law. The Apex Court has held that such an interpretation is totally impermissible. In that view of the matter, the said judgment would be of no assistance to the case of the assessee. 17. In the result, we hold that the view taken by the learned Tribunal is not sustainable in law. 18. The question on which we admitted the appeal is required to be answered in view of the judgment of the Apex Court i....