2009 (11) TMI 424

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....egi, SDR, for the Appellant. None, for the Respondent. [Order]. - Proceedings were initiated against the respondents on the ground that availment of Cenvat credit of Rs. 46,2.98/- and utilization of the same by them being the service tax paid on GTA services utilized for outward transportation, was not admissible. The Original Adjudicating Authority con firmed the demand and also demanded in....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....g for the Revenue submitted that in this case, penalty should have been imposed by the Original Adjudicating Authority in view of the fact that demand for Cenvat credit was confirmed by invoking extended period under Section 11A of the Central Excise Act, 1944. Whereas, the demand is confirmed on the ground of suppression of facts/mis-declaration, penalty under Section 11AC should have been impose....