9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (8) TMI 1506X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d period. We find that this is not legally permissible. The Show Cause Notice and the Impugned Order do not survive on limitation - the appeal is allowed on limitation. - EXCISE APPEAL NO.520/2010 - ORDER NO. 76807/2019 - Dated:- 29-8-2019 - Hon ble Shri P. Dinesha, Member (Judicial) And Hon ble Shri P Anjani Kumar, Member (Technical) Shri S. C. Mohanty, Advocate for the Applicant Shri D.Haider, A.R. for the Respondent ORDER Per : Shri P Anjani Kumar M/s. NALCO Ltd., the Appellants are engaged in the manufacture of Aluminium products falling under Chapter 76 of CETA, 1985; the appellants availed Cenvat Credit of Excise Duty paid on various inputs and capital goods received in the factory. On comparing t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The Show Cause Notice was adjudicated vide order dated 10.03.2010 which is under appeal. 2. Learned Counsel for the Appellants at the outset submits that the Show Cause Notice is barred by limitation; the generation of various scraps items in the factory is a routine and regular feature and the same are cleared from the factory to various independent customers on payment of service tax; the fact of generation of scrap and removal thereof periodically, is well within the knowledge of the department from the year 1997-98 and proceedings have been initiated. The Learned Counsel submits that the issue was in consideration of the department from 1999 onwards and the department was continuously in correspondence with the department. Range Sup ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... emand. 4. The Learned A.R. for the department has reiterated the findings or OIO. 5. Heard both sides and perused the records of the case. On going through records of the case it is very clear that the issue was in the knowledge of the department right from 1999. Superintendent incharge of the factory was in correspondence with the officers of the appellants right from 1999 onwards. Two Show Cause Notices have been issued during the interregnum and the same have been remanded back from the appellate stages. During the pendency of such remand proceedings the impugned proceedings have been initiated invoking the extended period. We find that this is not legally permissible. The Appellants rely upon the judgement of Apex Court in the cas ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
