Dr. Reddy S Laboratories Ltd vs Commissioner Of Customs, Central ...
- CitationAppeal No.49/2013
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
Where a assessee has, before any departmental audit or proceeding, reversed wrongly availed CENVAT credit together with interest, and has not utilised that credit, no penalty equal to the credit amount is warranted; the voluntary reversal of the credit and payment of interest prior to the initiation of departmental action takes the matter outside the scope of penalty for the wrongful availment.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
[Arising out of Order-in-Appeal No.49/2013 (H-IV) CE dated 18/07/2013 passed by Commissioner of Central Excise and Service Tax (Appeals), HYDERABAD-IV ]
For approval and signature:
HON'BLE SHRI B.S.V.MURTHY, TECHNICAL MEMBER
1 Whether Press Reporters may be allowed to see the Order for publication as per Rule 27 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982? No 2 Whether it should be released under Rule 27 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982 for publication in any authoritative report or not? No 3 Whether Their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the Order? Seen 4 Whether Order is to be circulated to the Departmental authorities? Yes
Dr. Reddys Laboratories Ltd (Formulation Tech Ops-II) Bachupally Village, Qutbullapur Mandal, R.R. District, HYDERABAD 500 072. AP Appellant(s)
Versus
Commissioner of Customs, Central Excise and Service Tax Hyderabad-IV Commissionerate, POSNETT BHAWAN, TILAK ROAD, RAMKOTI, HYDERABAD 500 001. ANDHRA PRADESH Respondent(s)
Appearance:
None (Written Submissions)
For the Appellant Mr. S. Teli, Dy. Commissioner (AR) For the Respondent
Date of Hearing: 02/01/2015
Date of Decision: 02/01/2015
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. B.S.V.MURTHY, TECHNICAL MEMBER
Final Order No: 20013 / 2015
Per : B.S.V.MURTHY
Nobody is present on behalf of the appellant, however, appellants have filed written submissions and they have requested that the same may be considered.
2. Since the issue lies in narrow compass, I dispense with the requirement of pre-deposit and take up the appeal for final decision.
3. The dispute involves availment of CENVAT credit of Rs.2,48,243/- in respect of services like club membership to M/s. Jubilee Hills Club, service of landscaping to their corporate office at Banjara Hills, packing and dispatch of gifts to celebrities during the period from December 2006 to September 2011.
3.1 It has been submitted that appellants had reversed the entire amount of service tax credit taken on their own on 10.2.2012 and interest of Rs.57,239/- was also paid on 20.3.2012. The audit of the appellant was conducted between 13.2.2012 to 16.2.2012 and therefore the principle had already been paid even before the audit was conducted by the appellant on their own. Nevertheless, proceedings were initiated resulting in appropriation of amounts paid and imposition of penalty equal to the credit taken by the appellant. It is the submission of the appellant that they had not even utilized the credit and even before the Department took up the issue, they had reversed the credit and therefore penalty is not warranted. I consider myself in agreement with the submissions.
4. In the result, the appeal is allowed with consequential relief, if any, to the appellant. It is made clear that CENVAT credit and the interest thereon reversed by the appellant is upheld as not contested.
(Operative portion of the Order was pronounced in open court)
B.S.V.MURTHY TECHNICAL MEMBER rv
3
This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.
Research this judgment with Miss Lucy
Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.
Try Miss Lucy free