2016 (6) TMI 618

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... edit after passing of the order-in-original. The violation of provision of Rule 3(5) is explicit. - There is no ground for waiver of penalty - Decided against the assessee. - ST/1192/2010 - A/30369/2016 - Dated:- 6-5-2016 - Ms. Sulekha Beevi, C.S., Member (Judicial) Shri K. Nagaraja Rao, Advocate for the Appellant Shri Chatur Singh, Assistant Commissioner (AR) for the Respondent .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... have heard both sides. 3. The learned counsel for appellant Sri K. Nagaraja Rao, submitted that he is not contesing the amount of ₹ 21,62,259/- as the appellant is not able to produce the Central Excise Invoices. He submitted that the confirmation of credit of ₹ 12,45,185/- is on the ground that appellant availed credit on capital goods and did not reverse the credit or pay the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ributable to transfer of capital goods was paid/reversed by appellant. The other SSAs have then taken credit. That, therefore the demand in respect of ₹ 12,45,185/- is not sustainable. 4. I am not convinced by the arguments put forward by the counsel for appellant. The appellant ought to have paid the duty or reversed the credit availed when the capital goods were transferred. The ap .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X