2017 (2) TMI 939

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... one by the Revenue. Extended period of limitation - Held that: - relying on the decision of Orissa Bridge & Construction Corpn. Ltd. vs. CCE Bhubaneswar [2008 (8) TMI 585 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA], it is held that extended period of limitation is not invokable for issuance of SCN. Penalty set aside - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
Mr Ashok Jindal, Member (Judicial) And Mr. Ashok K Arya, Member (Technical) Shri Vijay Kumar, Advocate for the Appellants Shri Yogesh Agarwal, AR for the Respondent Per Ashok Jindal : The appellant has filed an appeal against the impugned order for imposition of penalty under section 11AC of the Act. 2. The facts of the case are that on being pointed by the Audit that during the month of .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... t sustainable in the light of decision of CCE, NOIDA vs. Accurate Chemical Industries [2014 (310) ELT 441 (All)] and Union of India vs. T P L Industries Ltd. [2007 (214) ELT 506 (Raj)]. 5. On the other hand, learned AR reiterated the findings of the impugned order. 6. Heard both the sides. Considered the submissions in detail. In this case, the appellants are contesting the imposition of penalty imposed under section 11AC of the Act. Admittedly, Audit was conducted in January 2008 for the period October, 2007, when it was pointed out by the Audit, the appellant paid the duty along with interest which was entitled for cenvat credit to the principal manufacturer. In that situation, as per the provisions of section 11A(2B) of Central Excise .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ts were having malafide intentions not to pay duty or undervalue the job worked goods. Further, we find that when the appellant has paid duty along with interest on pointing out by the Audit, in that circumstances, if Revenue wants to issue the show cause notice, the same was required to be issued but within the prescribed time limit, but the same has not been done by the Revenue. In that circumstances, relying on the decision of Orissa Bridge & Construction Corpn. Ltd. vs. CCE Bhubaneswar [2011 (264) ELT 14 (SC)], we hold that extended period of limitation is not invokable for issuance of show cause notice. Therefore, the show cause notice is highly time barred. Further, we find that Revenue has not come with a positive evidence to show ma .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X