9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (6) TMI 263X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... otice was issued on 01.01.2010 for the provision to write off which was created in the financial records of the appellant as on 31.03.2008 which is beyond the period of limitation of one year - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - E/912/2012-SM - Final Order No. 20536/2017 - Dated:- 26-4-2017 - Shri S.S Garg, Judicial Member Shri G. Shivadass, Advocate - For the Appellant Shri Pakshi Rajan, AR - For the Respondent ORDER The present appeal is directed against the impugned order dated 21.01.2012 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) whereby the Commissioner (Appeals) has rejected the appeal of the appellant. Briefly the facts of the present case are that the appellants are engaged in the manufacture of excisa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... enalty under Rule 15(2) of the Cenvat Credit Rules 2004 read with Section 11 AC of the Central Excise Act 1944 was also imposed. Aggrieved by the Order-in-Original, the appellant filed appeal before the Commissioner who rejected the appeal of the appellant and hence the present appeal. 2. Heard both the parties and perused the records. 3. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the impugned order is not sustainable in law as the same has been passed contrary to the provisions of the Act and the binding judicial precedents. He further submitted that there was no recovery mechanism incorporated under Rule 3 of the Cenvat Credit Rules prior to 01.03.2013 to recover cenvat credit attributable to the value of inputs in r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . He further submitted that the appellants have not suppressed any facts from the Department much less acted with an intent to evade the payment of Central Excise Duty and hence the longer period of limitation in terms of proviso to Section 11A cannot be invoked in the present case. He also submitted that the demand in the present case is based on information available in the Trial Balance Sheet and is based on the audit objection. 4. On the other hand, the learned AR reiterated the findings of the impugned order and submitted that the fact of writing off the value of raw-materials/packing materials has been suppressed from their Books of Accounts as on 31.03.2008 from the Department and therefore the appellants have suppressed the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
