2025 (8) TMI 84

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....y the appellant during the period from April 2012 to March 2016, on foundation and structures raised for maintenance of effluent water treatment plants and electrical works etc. has been assailed by the assessee appellant in this appeal. 2. Fact of the case, in brief, is that appellant is a Tyre manufacturer having registration under Excise Act. It had availed CENVAT Credit on inputs, capital goods and input services as per CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 (CCR) in respect of Service Tax paid against receipt of service by it. During CERA audit made for the above referred period, it was pointed out that inadmissible credit amounting to Rs. 2,31,80,909/- was taken by the appellant and show cause-cum-demand notice was accordingly issued on 06.09.201....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....hat for such bonafied mistake, in view of judgment reported in Mahadev Logistics Vs. Customs Excise Settlement Commission in W.P. No. 113 of 2015, Sanghvi land developers Pvt Ltd Vs. Mumbai East in Appeal No. ST/87344/2018, M/s. Bajaj Travels Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Service Tax in CEAC-06 of 2009, Kanthuria Portfolio Vs. CCE 2003 (158)355(T), Goenka Woollen Mills Vs. CCE 2001 (135)ELT 873(T), no penalty can be imposed since there was no suppression of fact, as Audit had taken those figures from appellant's Accounts book only for which extended period is also not invocable. He further submitted with reference to para 1.17, judgment in the case of; Patton Ltd., V. CCE reported 2006 ELT 496, Aditya College of Competitive Exam v. CCE 2009 (16)....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....aid the same well in advance immediately after being pointed out by the Audit. Recovery proceedings on inadmissible credit are also initiated under Section 73 like recovery of tax dues, in which event, even Section 73 sub-clause 3 would have come to the rescue of appellant in prohibiting the Respondent Department to serve Show Cause Notice when either on its own ascertainment or on the basis of being informed by the Central Excise Officer (through Audit), such reversal was made before issue of show cause. Otherwise also, in view of decisions noted above in the preceding para on allegation of suppression, it is to be reiterated that when matter was pointed out by the audit, appellant is not supposed to be awarded with penalty by invoking ext....