9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (6) TMI 85X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s demand could not have been sustained in view of COMMISSIONER VERSUS MEGHMANI DYES INTERMEDIATES LTD. [ 2013 (6) TMI 141 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT] and M/S LG ELECTRONICS INDIA PVT. LTD. VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, (NOIDA) [ 2024 (4) TMI 533 - CESTAT ALLAHABAD] where it was held that 'Where merely a procedural violation in respect of complying with a condition of Notification cannot be said to be an act of suppression for invoking extended period of limitation. No justification for invoking extended period of limitation is forthcoming from the show cause notice, order in original or the impugned order.' The demand is barred by limitation - the impugned order is set aside - appeal allowed. - MR. SANJIV SRIVASTAVA, MEMBER (TE ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in case the demand is unsustainable. The said case law is not squarely applicable inasmuch as in the present case demand is clearly sustainable. 4.7 Thus, I find that the extended period of limitation has been rightly invoked in this case, for confirming demand recovery of CENVAT credit of Rs.48,253/- along with interest and for imposing penalty of Rs.48,253/ under Rule 15 of the Credit Rules. 2.1 The Appellant is engaged in manufacture of P P Medicines and P.H. Oil classifiable under Central Excise Act CETH 30049022 and 33059011 of Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. They also held service tax registration by payment of service tax in respect of GTA, Legal Service, Manpower Supply and Rent a Cab Service under reverse charge. 2.2 During the co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion 11A (4) 11AA of the Central Excise Act, 1944. II. I impose a penalty under Rule 15(2) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 read with Section 11AC (1) of the Central Excise Act, 1944. III. I confirm the demand of Rs.4,541/- (Rs. Four Thousand Forty-One only) under Rule 14 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 read with Sections 11A (4) of the Central Excise Act, 1944. Further I appropriate the amount of Rs.4,541/-, paid vide challan No.00003 dated 18.12.2018 and adjust them against the demand. As the party had already paid Rs.4,541/- before utilization of CENVAT Credit and before the issuance of show cause notice therefore, therefore no interest is recoverable and no penalty is imposed. IV. I order to recover interest of Rs.536/- for delayed payment of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... envat credit on rent-a-cab service and the anomaly came to the knowledge of the department only during the course of Audit. Therefore extended period of limitation under Section 11A(4) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 is invokable to recover the said dues. The noticee is also liable for penal action under Section 11AC(1) of the said Act read with Rule 15(2) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 due to the aforesaid reasons. 4.4 Order-in-Original also records as follows:- 5.6 During audit it has come to notice of the department that the CENVAT credit was taken by the party as ST-3 returns have information about consolidated CENVAT credit only and the CENVAT registers were never produced before the department earlier. Hence the judgement of Hon ble ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
