2008 (2) TMI 735

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ri S. Gautam, SDR, for the Respondent. [Order]. -  Heard both sides. 2. The appellant filed this appeal against the impugned order whereby demand was confirmed and penalty was imposed. The appellants are engaged in the manufacture of steel tor bars. The appellants are working under the Cenvat Scheme availing credit in respect of the duty paid on inputs used in the manufacture of....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....5. The Commissioner (Appeals) rejected appeal filed by the appellant. 6. I find that the appellant challenged the order on merits as well as on time-bar. On time-bar, the contention of the appellant is that the demand is for the period August 2001 to January 2002 and show-cause notice was issued on 12-7-2004 alleging suppression with intent to evade payment of duty against the appella....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nputs on which credit has been taken. 10. I find that on merit and in view of the decision of the Tribunal that the issue is settled against the appellant. 11. On the issue of time-bar, I find that the demand is for the period August 2001 to January 2002 and show-cause notice was issued on 12-7-04 alleging suppression with intent to evade payment of duty. The appellants were regula....