2016 (2) TMI 989

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....or the Respondent. ORDER Per: Ramesh Nair This appeal is directed against Order-in-Appeal No. AKP/38/NSK/2010 dated 22.02.2011 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) Central Excise Customs, Nasik, wherein the Ld. Commissioner rejected the Appeal filed by the Appellant, however the penalty Rs. 3,49,724/- imposed by the Adjudicating Authority was reduced to Rs. 2000/-. 2. The brief facts of the ca....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....r CENVAT credit, accordingly the CENVAT credit was disallowed by the adjudicating authority in the Order-in-Original No. 210/2010 dated 12.11.2010. Aggrieved by the said order, the appellant filed appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) who by accepting the view of the adjudicating authority, upheld the demand of CENVAT credit, however the penalty of equal amount of Rs. 3,49,724/- was reduced to ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e fact that May, 2009 onwards, no goods have been cleared under exemption is undisputed, therefore the credit should not have been denied. 5. On the other hand Shri N.N. Prabhu Desai, learned Superintendent (A.R.) appearing on behalf of the Revenue reiterates the findings of the impugned order. He submits that it is admitted fact that in May, 2009 the appellant have cleared the goods under exempt....