2014 (12) TMI 314

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d the confirmation of duty demand of Rs. 23,24,421/- and Rs. 31,381/- along with interest thereon for an amount of Rs. 3,11,608/- and has also imposed equivalent amount of penalty under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944 and a penalty of Rs. 1,98,62,309/- for the offences committed by them in respect of their clearances of the exempted goods during the period 07/2005 to 09/2006. Aggrieved of the same, the appellant is before us. 3. The case against the appellant, M/s. Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. is that he appellant cleared dutiable and exempted goods during the period March 2003 to June 2005 without maintaining separate accounts in respect of exempted goods. These supplies were made to Indian Navy claiming the benefit of duty ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....une 2005 is clearly time barred. Therefore, the question of confirmation of such demand along with interest and imposing penalties is clearly unsustainable in law. 5. The learned Additional Commissioner (AR) appearing for the Revenue on the other hand submits that under Rule 6 (3) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, goods supplied under Notification No. 64/95-CE had been specifically excluded and therefore, the appellant did not have the option to pay a sum @ 8% of the value of exempted goods and the appellants were required to pay an amount equivalent to the Cenvat Credit attributable to inputs used in or in relation to the manufacture of exempted final products at the time of clearance from the factory. Inasmuch as the appellant did not do thi....