9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (2) TMI 568X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ntative, for the Respondent. ORDER The facts of the case are that the appellants had removed some of their inputs to their sister concern situated at Silvassa under three invoices by paying duty on the 'transaction value' instead of reversing the Cenvat credit as per Rule 3(4)(b) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. The differential duty involved was Rs. 1,24,444/- and was detected at the time of p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was issued on 5-2-2009. He submits that this was only a mistake and there was no intention to evade duty. Therefore, as soon as the omission was pointed out, the duty amount payable of Rs. 1,24,444/- with interest was debited on the very same day. He also submits that since clearances were made to the sister concern, there was no need for them to resort to any undervaluation at all since whatever ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... have considered the submissions made by both sides. The extended period has been invoked and has been upheld on the ground that when the goods have been cleared to the sister unit, the duty was paid only on notional value since supply has been made to the sister unit. The Commissioner (Appeals) has also observed that the advocate for the appellant could not explain whether they were following thi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... puts. Further there is no finding that the sister unit did not take the credit of the amount for the goods were diverted by sister unit for imposition of penalty under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944 since duty with interest has not been challenged, it is necessary for the department to establish that there was any intention to evade duty. The circumstances of the case clearly show th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
