2012 (4) TMI 659

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. ORDER Having heard learned counsel for the parties in this appeal under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944, which is directed against the order dated 14th February, 2012 passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, we frame the following substantial question of law :- "Whether the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal w....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s closed the business and today he is working as a share broker and an LIC agent. It is pointed out that income of the appellant is to the tune of Rs. 3-4 lacs per annum. In these circumstances, it is submitted that it is not possible for the appellant to pay Rs. 30 lacs as directed for hearing of the appeal on merits. It is submitted that the penalty has been imposed on presumption and without ta....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....as having availed of and taken Cenvat benefit on the basis of the alleged fictitious sale made by the appellant. In Paragraph 8 of the impugned order the Member (Judicial) has recorded as under :- "8. In terms of the above, we hold that the credit availed by them was reversed by utilizing for payment of duty, which even according to the Revenue, they were not required to pay. Inasmuc....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....n mind the income declared by the appellant in the income-tax returns. From the computation filed along with the return it is noticed that the appellant has been claiming benefit under Section 80C to the extent of Rs. 80,000-1,00,000/-. 8. Keeping in view the aforesaid factual position, we modify the order passed by the Tribunal and reduce the amount directed to be deposited for hearing of....