9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (12) TMI 35X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cise Act, 1944 and not as per the meaning of deemed sale under Article 366(29A)(b) of the Constitution. Period of limitation - Held that: - reliance placed on the decision of the case of CCE Vs. Centre Point Colour Lab [2011 (9) TMI 269 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI], where it was held that longer period of limitation would not be available to the Revenue. Demand set aside - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - Appeal No.ST/777/2012 (DB) - Final Order No.54747/2016 - Dated:- 6-10-2016 - Ms. Archana Wadhwa, Member (Judicial) And Mr. V. Padmanabhan, Member (Technical) Shri Jatin Mahajan, Advocate - for the Appellant Shri Ranjan Khanna, A.R.- for the Respondent Per Archana Wadhwa: The demand to the tune of ₹ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ation by the Government as also by the Tribunal. Government in its Circular F. No. 233/2/2003-CX-4, dated 7-4-2004 addressed to the Punjab Colour Lab Association had clarified that service provider was entitled to claim exemption in respect of inputs, material consumed/sold to the service recipient. Apart from the above clarification, the earlier decision of the Tribunal in the case of Shilpa Colour Lab as also in the case of Adlab Labs etc. were in favour of the assessee. As such, it can be safely concluded that there could be bona fide belief on the part of the respondents as regards non-inclusion of the material cost in the value of services. The issue stands decided against the respondents by the Larger Bench decision of the Tribunal de ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... itation. The Bench further observed that on account of bona fide belief, no penalty is required to be imposed. By applying the ratio of the above decision to the facts of the present case, we hold that the demand beyond the period of limitation is time barred and no penalty is required to be imposed. Matters are remanded for requantifying the duty demand falling within the period of limitation. While requantifying the duty, the claim of the appellants as regards the credit of duty/tax paid on the raw materials is required to be considered and if found eligible, to be allowed. 4. The ld. DR fairly agrees that the issue of limitation stands decided by the Tribunal in the above referred decision rendered under identical circumstances. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
