Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
M/S. Beml Ltd vs Commissioner Of Central Excise, ... on 12 October, 2017
CUSTOMS, EXCISE & SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SOUTH ZONAL BENCH BANGALORE Appeal(s) Involved: E/960/2012-SM [Arising out of Order-in-Original No. 05/2012 dated 24/01/2012 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise, Bangalore.] M/s. BEML Ltd BEML Nagar, KGF 563115. Appellant(s) Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Customs and Service Tax Bangalore-I POST BOX NO 5400, CR BUILDINGS, BANGALORE 560 001. KARNATAKA Respondent(s)
Appearance:
Ms. Shruthi, Advocate V.LAKSHMI KUMARAN B-6/10, SAFDARJUNG ENCLAVE NEW DELHI-110029 For the Appellant Mr. N. Jagadish, AR For the Respondent Date of Hearing: 12/10/2017 Date of Decision: 12/10/2017 CORAM:
HON'BLE SHRI S.S GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER Final Order No. 22430 / 2017 Per : S.S GARG The present appeal is directed against the impugned order dated 24.1.2012 passed by the Commissioner, whereby the Commissioner has confirmed the demand of interest of Rs.18,05,352/- under Rule 14 of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 read with Section 11AB of the Central Excise Act, 1944 and also imposed a penalty of Rs.5,00,000/- under Rule 15(2) of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 read with Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944.
2. Briefly the facts of the present case are that the appellant is a Public Sector Undertaking (PSU) engaged in the manufacture of excisable goods falling under Chapter 84 and 87 of the CETA. During the scrutiny of the records, it was noticed that the appellants have wrongly availed the CENVAT credit of Rs.2,39,14,436/- and Rs.67,86,417/-. On being pointed out, the appellant reversed the CENVAT credit. Thereafter, a show-cause notice was issued proposing to demand the interest and the penalty and after following the due process, the Commissioner has confirmed the demand for interest and penalty. Aggrieved by the said order, the appellant has filed the present appeal.
3. Heard both the parties and perused the records.
4. After hearing both sides I find that the issue involved in the present case is no more res integra and is settled in favour of the appellant by a decision of the Honble Karnataka High Court in the case of CCE & ST., LTU, Bangalore vs. Bill Forge Pvt. Ltd [2012(2379)ELT 209 (Kar)] and also in the case of CCE Madurai vs. Strategic Engineering (P) Ltd [2014(310)ELT 509 (Mad)] wherein, following the decision in the case of M/s. Bill Forge Pvt. Ltd., it was held that interest and penalty is not imposable where credit wrongly availed has been reversed prior to utilization. Learned counsel for the appellant also submitted that this Honble Bench in the appellants own case vide Final Order No. 21405/2015 dated 29.05.2015 and Final Order No.20608/2016 dated 4.8.2016 following the decision in the case of M/s. Bill Forge Pvt. Ltd. (supra) and Strategic Engineering Pvt. Ltd., (supra) set aside the demand of interest and imposition of penalty. Further, this issue has been settled by the larger Bench of this Tribunal in the case of JK Tyre & Industries Ltd., wherein the Larger Bench vide its order dated 23.07.2015 has held that the decision of the Honble Karnataka High Court in the case of M/s. Bill Forge Pvt. Ltd. (supra) constituted the law governing and operative on the facts and transaction in the current appeal. Since the appellant had merely availed the credit and reversed the same before utilizing the availed credit for remittance of duty, interest liability would not arise.
4. In view of the Larger Bench of the Tribunal following the decision of the Honle Karnataka High court in the case of M/s. Bill Forge Pvt. Ltd. (supra), I set aside the impugned order and hold that no interest is demandable from the appellant and no penalty can be imposed. Hence, the appeal is allowed with consequential relief if any.
(Operative portion of the Order was pronounced in Open Court on 12/10/2017) S.S GARG JUDICIAL MEMBER rv 4