2017 (1) TMI 1075 - AT - Central Excise

Validity of SCN - the SCN was issued after more than 19 months after the date of conduct of audit - proviso to Section 11A of Central Excise Act, 1944 - Held that - ruling of the Hon ble High Court at Allahabad in the said case of C.C.E. & S.T. vs. Triveni Engineering Industries Ltd. 2015 (1) TMI 760 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT , is squarely applicable in the present case where it was held that without their being any intention to evade payment of tax omission cannot be a ground to invoke proviso to said Section 11A especially when the evasion came to the notice of the department when the audit was conducted 22 months before the date of issue of SCN - the SCN in the instant case issued by invocation of proviso to Section 11A ibid is not sustainable in law - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.

Summary

Issues:
- Appeal against Order-in-Appeal No. 238/CE/APPL/NOIDA/09 dated 31.08.2009
- Alleged differential duty payable by the appellant due to loading amortization charges
- Alleged inadmissible Cenvat credit on capital goods and input services
- Show cause notice issued after 19 months of audit
- Applicability of proviso to Section 11A of Central Excise Act, 1944

Analysis:
The appellant, engaged in manufacturing plastic parts, was audited, revealing alleged differential duty payment issues and inadmissible Cenvat credit. The show cause notice, issued after 19 months post-audit, raised concerns regarding the limitation period. The appellant argued that the notice was unsustainable under the law, citing a High Court ruling. The appellant contended that the notice was issued beyond the limitation period, invoking the proviso to Section 11A of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The appellant relied on the case law of C.C.E. & S.T. vs. Triveni Engineering and Industries Ltd., emphasizing the absence of deliberate suppression of facts. The Tribunal, following the High Court ruling, found the show cause notice unsustainable due to the absence of deliberate evasion, setting aside the Order-in-Original and Order-in-Appeal, granting relief to the appellant based on legal grounds.

In conclusion, the Tribunal's judgment highlighted the importance of adherence to legal provisions regarding the limitation period for issuing show cause notices, emphasizing the need for deliberate intent to evade payment for invoking relevant sections of the law. The appellant's appeal was allowed based on the legal principles established in the cited case law, ensuring fair treatment and relief in accordance with the law.