2011 (10) TMI 150

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Per M. Veeraiyan Heard both sides. 2. A show-cause notice dated 21.10.2008 was issued proposing denial of credit of Rs. 34,89,736/- relating to the period 2004-05 to 2006-07 along with other consequences. Original authority confirmed the demand as proposed in the show-cause notice and adjusted an amount of Rs. 94,220/- paid before issue of show-cause notice and also confirmed demand of i....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....31,166/- was not admissible to them on merits they contested the demand on time bar. The Commissioner has erroneously treated their submission regarding time bar as applicable only in respect of a demand of Rs. 32,58,570/- only. Therefore his sustaining the said demand and sustaining the equal amount of penalty under Section 78 is erroneous. He also draws my attention to the findings of the Commis....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....present case that the assessee has reflected the relevant details in the ST-3 returns and they were subjected to scrutiny by the audit takes. 6. I have carefully considered the submissions from both sides and perused the records. I find that the assessee has admitted that credit to the tune of Rs. 2,31,166/- was not eligible to them. Commissioner (Appeals) has therefore considered the issues re....