https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=336256 The appeal against Order-in-Appeal No. 09/CE/ALLD/2013 dated 24-06-2013, involving a demand raised under Rule 3 (5A) of CCR, 2004 and penalty under Section 11 AC of the Act, was allowed by the Learned Commissioner (Appeals). The Tribunal set aside the demand and penalty as the appellant had not taken Modvat or Cenvat credit at the time of acquiring the plant and machinery sold as waste and scrap. The Tribunal also considered depreciation calculations under Rule 3(5) and dismissed the appeal by the Revenue, finding no suppression or misconduct by the respondent. The show cause notice invoking the extended period of limitation was deemed unfounded, benefiting the respondent. en-us Thu, 31 Mar 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Sun, 18 Dec 2016 20:13:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=336256 The appeal against Order-in-Appeal No. 09/CE/ALLD/2013 dated 24-06-2013, involving a demand raised under Rule 3 (5A) of CCR, 2004 and penalty under Section 11 AC of the Act, was allowed by the Learned Commissioner (Appeals). The Tribunal set aside the demand and penalty as the appellant had not taken Modvat or Cenvat credit at the time of acquiring the plant and machinery sold as waste and scrap. The Tribunal also considered depreciation calculations under Rule 3(5) and dismissed the appeal by the Revenue, finding no suppression or misconduct by the respondent. The show cause notice invoking the extended period of limitation was deemed unfounded, benefiting the respondent. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 31 Mar 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=336256