9911796707
Advanced Search 
TMI Blog2018 (11) TMI 353X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t they received grey fabrics from merchant manufacturers/ exporters in terms of Notification 28/2003-CE(NT) dated 01.04.2003 which permits endorsement of raw material documents. He argued that they took credit on the basis of such endorsed invoices received from the principal manufacturers for whom they were doing job work. They processed the goods and cleared the same on payment of duty under proper invoices to the said principal manufacturers. The appellant received SCN invoking extended period of limitation for recovery of Cenvat Credit availed on the strength of such endorsed documents. The SCN alleged that the documents on the strength of which they had availed credit were issued by fake/ non-existent firms. It was also alleged that th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... utinized the returns and found no discrepancies with the things. He argued that extended period of limitation has been invoked in circumstances where there is no fault of others. Even if, the alert circulars are correct, no allegation of fraud, suppression etc. can be made against the appellant as they were not involved in the said fraudulent practice. In these circumstances extended period of limitation cannot be invoked. Ld. Counsel relied on the decision of Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of Prayagraj Dyeing & Printing Mills (P) Ltd. 2013 (290) ELT 61 (Guj.). He also relied on the decision of Tribunal in the case of Shri Labdhi Prints 2018 (360) ELT 138 (Tri. Amd.). The appellant M/s RTML is also in appeal against penalty impos ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... j Dyeing & Printing Mills P. Ltd. (supra), Tribunal in the case of Shri Labdhi Prints (supra) observed as follows: "3. Both sides fairly agree that the demand is confirmed invoking extended period of limitation and the issue on merit is covered in favour of the Revenue but on limitation in favour of the assessee by the decision of Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Prayagraj Dyg. & Ptg. Mills Pvt. Ltd. v. UOI - 2013 (290) E.L.T. 61 (Guj.). 4. Undisputedly the issue is covered by the decision of Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in Prayagraj Dyg. & Ptg. Mills' case (supra) and the demands had been confirmed for extended period of limitation, accordingly, the impugned Order is set aside and the appeal is allowed." In the case of Prayagraj ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dulent/ non-existent party. In the aforesaid background relying on the decision of Tribunal in case of Shri Labdhi Prints (supra), the demand of Cenvat Credit is set aside on the ground of limitation. 9. The second issue relates to sanction of rebate claim to M/s Dolar Tek and imposition of equivalent penalty on M/s RTML. In the said case, the extended period of limitation has not been invoked. The appellant has argued that Section 11AC of Central Excise Act, 1944 cannot be invoked to impose penalty as there is no demand raised in the said proceedings against the appellant. It is seen that penalty has been sought to be imposed under Rule 15(2) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 read with section 11AC of Central Excise Act. The penalty impose ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
