2018 (9) TMI 3

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ppeal against order-in-appeal no. CD/307 & 308/Bel/2016 dated 29th February 2016 of Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Mumbai Zone - II which, while dropping the penalty imposed by the original authority, confirmed recovery of wrongly availed CENVAT credit to the extent of Rs. 14,553/- along with recovery of interest amounting to Rs. 261379/-. 2. It would appear that on the basis of audit .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... riod beyond five years and place reliance on decision of Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat in Commissioner of Central Excise and Customs, Vadodara - II v. Gujarat Narmada Fertilizers Co Ltd [2012 (285) ELT 336 (Guj.)]. 3. Learned Authorised Representative opposed the plea that limitation would apply to the demand. According to him, before the first appellate authority the appellant had merely contes .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Vidyut Ltd [2016 (331) ELT 231 (Chh.)] and of the Tribunal in Commissioner of Central Excise, Allahabad v. Balrampur Chini Mills Ltd [2014 (300) ELT 449 (Tri.- Del.)] but has, nevertheless, set aside the penalty. In these circumstances the claim of the Learned Counsel that the extended period is not invokable does not sustain. Consequently, the interest calculation should be re-worked accordingly, .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X