9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (3) TMI 739X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e, no demand can be raised against the Appellant and the decision of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Indsur Global Limited was taken up by the Revenue before the Hon'ble Supreme Court in UNION OF INDIA & ORS. VERSUS INDSUR GLOBAL LTD. [2024 (7) TMI 1559 - SC ORDER (LB)], Larger Bench of the Supreme Court disposed of the SLP filed by the Revenue as not pressed. Under these circumstances, the decision of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Indsur Global Ltd. is holding the field. Accordingly, relying on the decision of Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of the Indsur Global Ltd., the demand against the Appellant is not sustainable. Consequently, no penalty is imposable. Conclusion - The demand and penalties based ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... paid by the Appellant by 5th day of May, 2014 as per the provisions of Rule 8(1) of the Central Excise Rules, 2002. Further, as per the provisions of Rule 8(3A) of the Central Excise Rules, 2002, during the period of default i.e. 05.06.2014 to 15.07.2014, the Appellant was required to pay the duty for the month of April, 2014 alongwith interest under Rule 8(3) of the Central Excise Rules, 2002. Therefore, demand for the said period was raised by issuance of Show Cause Notice against the Appellant and the matter was adjudicated holding that the Appellant again utilized the Cenvat credit during the intervening period instead of paying through PLA. Vide the Order-in-Original, following order was passed : - "ORDER 1. I confirm the demand an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r, Noida-1 is upheld to the extent of confirmation of demand of duty alongwith interest. (2) The penalty imposed in excess of Rs.5,000/- in the impugned order is set aside. The appeal is thus partially allowed. 3. Against the said order, the Appellant has filed the present appeal before the Tribunal. 4. Heard both the sides and perused the appeal records. 5. I find that the issue involved in the present appeal relates to failure to discharge monthly payment of duty under Rule 8(3A) of the Central Excise Rules, 2002. I find that the issue involved in this matter has been decided by the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Indsur Global Limited Vs. Union of India, 2014(12) EMI 525 (Guj) and Sandley Industries Ltd. Vs. Union of Indi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
