2014 (8) TMI 852

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... For the Respondent Mr. Kamal Sehgal, Advocate ORDER Ajay Kumar Mittal, J. 1. This appeal has been preferred by the assessee under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (in short "the Act") against the order dated 21.4.2014 (Annexure A-1) passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as "the Tribunal") claiming the following ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....terial but invoices were supplied and manufacturers were taking credit without actual receipt of material. Investigation was also initiated against the appellant. A show cause notice dated 30.3.2006 was issued to the appellant for imposing penalty under Rule 26 of Cenvat Credit Rules 2001/02. The said show cause notice was duly replied by the appellant. The Adjudicating Authority vide order dated ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.....2.2012 (Annexure A- 4), the appellant filed CWP No. 9299 of 2012. This Court vide order dated 5.7.2012 (Annexure A-5) granted interim stay. Ultimately, this Court vide order dated 23.1.2013 (Annexure A-6) dismissed the writ petition with liberty to the appellant to file an appeal. The appellant filed CEA No. 40 of 2013 and this Court vide order dated 1.5.2013 (Annexure A-7) dismissed the appea....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ces noticed hereinabove. It was urged that in the interest of justice, delay in deposit of Rs. 5 lacs be condoned as in the case of the company the appeal is fixed for final hearing before the Tribunal. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for respondent No.1 supported the order passed by the Tribunal. 5. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and in view of the facts and the circums....