9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (6) TMI 1212X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e respondent produced the Balance Sheet only during the investigation and not prior to that. HELD THAT:- Undisputed facts of the case are, as recorded in paragraph 6 of the show cause notice, it was issued based on the balance sheet for the year ending 2008. Thus, the contentions of the Revenue that respondents trading activity was not known to the department and that it was learnt based on intelligence report are not tenable. The substantial questions raised by the Revenue are answered in favour of the assessee - Appeal dismissed. - CENTRAL EXCISE APPEAL NO.16/2021 - - - Dated:- 1-6-2022 - HON BLE MR. JUSTICE P.S. DINESH KUMAR AND HON BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE Appellant (By Sri Jeevan J Neralagi, AGA) Respon ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the factual aspects involved in the present case there by leading to perversity? 2. Heard Sri Jeevan J Neeralgi, learned AGA for the appellant/Revenue and Sri Ravi Raghavan, learned advocate for the respondent/assessee. 3. Brief facts of the case are, respondent is engaged in the business of manufacture and clearance of turbo chargers, electric motor, transformer etc. falling under Chapter 85 of Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 ( CETA, 1985 for short). They are also engaged in providing taxable output services such as management, maintenance, repairs etc. For the purpose of payment of service tax on the services rendered and on the import of services, they have obtained service tax registration. Based on the intelligence report, a s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to normal period was also set-aside during the relevant period on the ground that there was much confusion with regard to the availment of credit for trading activities. 5. Feeling aggrieved, the revenue has filed this appeal. 6. Sri Jeevan J Neeralgi, learned standing counsel submitted that: Assessee did not declare its trading activities in the returns; Based on the intelligence report, the department learnt about the trading activities of the assessee. Findings recorded by the CESTAT in paragraph 6 of its order that the department was well aware of the trading activity of the respondent is factually incorrect. Though the said finding is a matter of fact, since it is perverse on the face of it, it amounts to questi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s clarificatory in nature and can be held to be applicable even for the past period. Thus, at the relevant period of time. Viz., from April 2009 to March 2011, the Assessee was, obviously, under bona fide belief in view of the conflicting decisions of the Tribunals during that period and taking the trading activity as Exempted Services, availed the CENVAT Credit which is sought to be reversed and recovered by the Department invoking the extended period of limitation. Such a bona fide belief cannot be held to be done with ulterior purpose for evading the Duty and therefore, the extended period of limitation would not be available to the Revenue Authority in view of the aforesaid decision rendered by the Hon ble Supreme Court . 11. In vie ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
