9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (7) TMI 936X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... When there are conflicting judgments on the issue, the extended period is not invokable and that the show-cause notice was beyond the limitation period. The SCN is clearly time barred - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - E/20418/2014-SM - 20992/2017 - Dated:- 29-5-2017 - Shri S.S Garg, Judicial Member Shri M.S. Nagaraja, Advocate, For the Appellant Shri Parasivamurthy N.K., Deputy Commissioner (AR), For the Respondent ORDER Per: SS GARG The present appeal is directed against the impugned order dated 29.11.2013 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) wherein the Commissioner (Appeals) has allowed the Departmental appeal and set aside the Order-in-Original. Briefly the facts of the present case ar ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed the proceedings. On appeal by the Department, the Commissioner (Appeals) vide the impugned order has allowed the appeal filed by the Department. Aggrieved by the said impugned order, the appellant is before this Tribunal. 2. Heard both the parties arid 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 in total violation of the statutory provision and by ignoring the binding judicial precedents. He further submitted that the appellants have taken the cenvat credit on capital goods imported in December 2004 and after installation and use the same was cleared as used machinery under Invoice No.21 dated 02.05.2006 without payment of cenvat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed by CESTAT, Bangalore. 3.1. He further submitted that the assessee has rightly followed the provisions of Cenvat Credit Rules 2004 as existing at the time of clearance of used capital goods on 02.05.2006 and the stand of the appellant is vindicated by the judgments cited supra and therefore there cannot be any suppression of facts or contravention of Cenvat Credit Rules 2004 with intent to evade payment of duty. He also submitted that the appellant vide letter dated 29.01.2008 which is produced on record has furnished the details of the value of clearances month-wise in order to correlate the value of clearances in VAT Returns and ER-1 Returns. The clearance of used machinery for a sale price of ₹ 11,40,000/- (Rupees Eleven Lak ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... remanded the case to the adjudicating authority to reconsider the limitation only and take a fresh view. I also find that in de novo adjudication, the original authority vide Order dated 15.03.2012 recorded a detailed findings and dropped the proceedings on the ground that the demand is time-barred but Commissioner (Appeals) has set aside that judgment by relying upon the earlier decision of the Commissioner which has specifically been set aside by the Tribunal vide its Order dated 07.10.2011. Further I also find that the factum of clearance of the used machinery was informed to the Department by the appellant vide its letter dated 29.01.2008 and this fact has been considered by the original authority. I also find that the assessee has cor ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
