TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (7) TMI 1196
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....der dated 23.02.2011 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Allahabad, upholding the adjudged demand confirmed in the original order. 2. Brief facts of the present case are that the appellant is engaged in the manufacture of VP Sugar and Molasses, falling under Chapter 17 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. The factory of the appellant was audited by the Central Excise Depart....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....on of penalty under Rule 15(2) ibid are the subject matter of the present dispute. 3. I have heard the Ld. Counsel for both the sides and perused the records. 4. I find that no specific allegations have been made in the SCN as to why the invoices on which cenvat credit has been taken by the appellant, should not be considered as proper/ valid documents and how the provisions of Rule 3 & 4 of the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... in my opinion, the extended period cannot be invoked, justifying confirmation of the demand beyond the period of one year. In this context, I find that the judgments cited by the Ld. Advocate in the case of M/s Nestle India Ltd. vs CCE Chandigarh reported in 2009 TIOL 26-SC-Cx, Tamil Nadu Housing Board vs CCE Madras reported in 1994 (74) ELT 9 (SC) and Continental Foundation Jt. Venture vs CCE Ch....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... misstatement etc, have been alleged by the authorities below, but no tangible evidences were produced to prove that the appellant has indulged in the activities, concerning suppression, willful misstatement with the intention to evade payment of service tax. In absence of any specific proof by the authority below that the ingredients mentioned in the proviso to Section 73 ibid are present in this....