2021 (7) TMI 162

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the Respondent ORDER The above appeal is filed against the penalty imposed upon the appellant under section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944 read with Rule 15 Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. The appellant had availed input service credit of Rs. 2,21,200/- on Works Contract Service [Repair and Maintenance] and Man-power Supply Service [Driver] during the period from 2011-12 to 2012-13. During the....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t along with interest immediately on being pointed out by the department. Thereafter, department has waited about thirty months to issue the show-cause notice only to allege suppression of facts and to invoke the extended period so as to impose and collect penalty. He relied upon the decisions of the Apex Court in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Chandigarh Vs M/s. Pepsi Foods Ltd., rep....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....eligible credit availed by the appellant would not have come to light unless the audit had taken place. Therefore, it is a clear case of suppression on the part of the appellant. He submitted that the impugned order required no interference. 4. Heard both sides. 5. On perusal of records, it is seen that the appellant has reversed the credit availed on Works Contract Service and Man-power Supply ....