9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (5) TMI 623X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g: Heard both sides 2. Common issue is involved in these appeals therefore are being taken up together. 3. M/s L. Kant Paper Mills Ltd. filed this appeal challenging the demand of Rs., 97,505/-. Shri Nikhil Agrawal, Director of the applicant filed appeal challenging the imposition of penalty of Rs.50,000/-. The brief facts of the case are that M/s L. Kant Paper Mills ltd. is engaged in the manu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... se of Vikram Cement Vs. CCE 2012 (286) ELT 615. The applicant also tried to argue the time bar issue and relied upon the Hon'ble Supreme Court's decision in the case of Orissa Bridge & Construction Corpn. Ltd. Vs. CCE 2011 (264) ELT 14 (SC). The Revenue relied upon the statement of Shri Nikhil Agrawal where he had admitted the clearance of goods without payment of duty. Shri Deepak, authorised sig ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 9.435 MT of ingots of M/s Sarada Steel Industries whereas the duty has been paid on in respect of 45.085 MTs. 6. The appellant relied upon the decision of the Tribunal in the case of M/s Vikram Cement (supra) where the inputs were found short and the Director admitted the shortage of inputs. However, the Revenue was asking for duty on the ground that input found short were used in the final produ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t paying duty. In this situation, the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that the Revenue was not justified invoking the extended period of limitation. 8. In the present case, the admission made by the appellant the Director of the manufacturing unit as well as the authorised signatory of the recipient that the goods were cleared and received without payment of duty. It is not the case of the appellant t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
