TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (12) TMI 82
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hri Kunal Agarwal, Advocates for the Appellant Shri Rajeev Kapoor, Authorized Representative for the Respondent ORDER The appellant is in appeal against impugned order wherein demand of interest has been raised against the appellant and penalty under Section 77(2) of the Finance Act, 1994 was also imposed. 2. The facts of the case are that the appellant is engaged in telecom infrastructural....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. In fact appellant has not taken full credit on inputs/input services availed and no reversal was shown separately under Rule 3(5A) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 while removing the capital goods which became scrap/waste. The appellant was following the said method during the impugned period. Upon reconciliation of the records of the appellant, the said method ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d as scrap as well as on capital goods found physically deficient along with interest and imposition of penalty. By way of impugned order, demand on account of recovery of Cenvat credit in terms of Rule 3(5A) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 was dropped but demand of interest was confirmed and penalty of Rs.10,000/- was imposed under Section 77(2) of the Finance Act, 1994. Aggrieved from the said orde....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t shown. Therefore, penalty is also not imposable. 5. On the other hand, learned Authorized Representative supported the impugned order and submitted that as they have shown reversal on Cenvat credit through their revised returns, in that circumstances, interest is payable for the intervening period and as they have not filed correct details in their ST-3 returns in time, therefore penalty was ri....