9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (6) TMI 182X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... goods which needs to be reversed on its sale unless it is established that the appellants have availed CENVAT credit, the demand for reversal of CENVAT credit does not arise. Time limitation - suppression of facts or not - HELD THAT:- There is no suppression on the part of the appellant with intent to evade payment of duty because the entire demand has been raised based on the documents furnished voluntarily by the appellant during the course of enquiry - extended period cannot be invoked. The impugned order is not sustainable on merit as well as on limitation - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - E/20463/2018-SM - Final Order No. 20388/2019 - Dated:- 2-5-2019 - SHRI S.S GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... law. He further submitted that the capital goods viz. Spectrophotometer, turbine, fork lifts have been cleared after use for more than 15 years and hence, the question of either reversal of credit on depreciated value or demand of duty on transaction value does not arise. He further submitted that they have purchased these capital goods more than 15 years back, they are not in possession of the said documents. Further, the appellants are not even very sure about the availment of credit in respect of any of these capital goods. Under these circumstances, the very demand of duty itself is contrary to the provisions of Rule 3(5A) of the CCR, 2004. He also submits that the demand of duty on transaction value is not at all sustainable as it is c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oods being procured more than 10 years back as per the appellant, no record is available with the appellant as according to him he is not required to maintain the record beyond 5 years and further, the entire demand appears to be time barred because the SCN was issued on 11.02.2015 for the period 2010-11 and 2011-12. There is no suppression on the part of the appellant with intent to evade payment of duty because the entire demand has been raised based on the documents furnished voluntarily by the appellant during the course of enquiry. In view of my discussion above, I am of the considered view that the impugned order is not sustainable on merit as well as on limitation. Therefore, I set aside the same by allowing the appeal of the appella ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
