2016 (5) TMI 1331

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....2-CE dated 14.11.2002. As per the said notification, the appellant was required to pay duty on the addition made by them, that is first to avail Cenvat Credit on inputs and same is to be utilized for paying duty on the said goods and remaining is to be paid through PLA. The amount is paid through PLA is entitled for refund in the next month, the appellant paid duty through PLA during the period August 2009 to May 2010 and filed refund claim of the duty paid through PLA. The said refund claims were pending for adjudication. Therefore the appellant could not pay duty through PLA during the period July 2010 to December 2010. The appellant did not pay the duty in time for the period July 2010 to December 2010. After scrutiny of records, a show ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Bombay, therefore, penalty on the appellant is rightly imposed by the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals). 5. Heard the parties and considered the submissions. 6. On examination of the decision of Paras Lubricants Ltd. (supra) submitted by the Ld. AR, I find that the said decision is not the final decision but only a stay order against the decision of this Tribunal which is contrary to argument advance by the Ld. A.R. Further, the contention of the Revenue is that the order of this Tribunal in the case of Paras Lubricants Ltd. (supra) has been affirmed, which is not correct, in fact it is stayed by the Honble High Court of Bombay. Therefore, the decision of Paras Lubricants Ltd. (supra) has no relevant to facts of this case. Moreover, the is....