9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (10) TMI 370X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tended period of limitation - HELD THAT:- Once the appellant has disclosed all the facts in the ST3 returns and has not suppressed any facts from the Department, then the Department cannot invoke the extended period of limitation and confirmed the demand - In the present case, the period of dispute is January 2012 to March 2012 whereas the show-cause notice has been issued on 07/10/2014 which is beyond the period of limitation as prescribed under the law. Appeal allowed on the ground of limitation. - ST/20661/2019-SM - Final Order No. 20864/2019 - Dated:- 9-10-2019 - MR. S.S GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER For the Appellant : Shri N. Anand, Advocate For the Respondent : Shri Madhupsharan, Asst. Commissioner ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rguments only on the point of limitation because the entire demand is barred by limitation. He further submitted that the entire demand has been confirmed on account of the fact that the appellant has suppressed the material fact and they had neither mentioned the fact of availing the CENVAT credit in their ER1 returns filed with the Department nor did they inform the Department in any manner. The learned counsel submitted that this finding of the Commissioner(Appeals) is factually incorrect because the Commissioner(Appeals) himself in para 2 of the impugned order has observed that verification of ST3 returns filed by the appellant have disclosed that they have taken ineligible CENVAT credit. He further submitted that there is no suppressio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d AR defended the impugned order. 6. After considering the submissions by both the sides and material on record, I find that the original authority has allowed the CENVAT credit on the impugned services and on appeal by the Department, the Commissioner(Appeals) has reversed the decision of the original authority and has also held that the appellant has suppressed the material fact from the Department and has not disclosed the same in their ST3 return. The finding of the Commissioner(Appeals) that the appellants have not disclosed these facts and have not filed the ST3 returns is factually incorrect. The show-cause notice itself was issued on the basis of the scrutiny of the ST3 returns filed by the appellant wherein the appella ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
