2018 (1) TMI 468

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ommr (AR) - for respondent ORDER Per: Archana Wadhwa All the three appeals are being disposed of by a common order as the issue involved in all of them is identical. 2. After hearing both sides, duly represented by Shri Abhijeet Saha, learned Advocate appearing for appellant and Shri Manoj Kumar, Authorised Representative for Revenue, I find that the appellant, who are in engaged in th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... any duty on the same. The audit objected to that on the ground that as the appellant had availed credit in respect of the D.G. set and has surrendered their licence at Thane, they are under legal obligation to reverse the CENVAT credit so availed by them. The appellant agreed to the above proposition and accordingly paid duty of excise on the D.G. set also along with interest. 3. In the above ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... D.G. set or to pay any duty. Though they are still of the view that inasmuch as D.G. Set was not being cleared from their factory there was no need to pay any duty, but they paid duty along with interest so as to avaoid litigation. In such a scenario no malafide intention can be attributed to them so as to impose penalty. 5. On the other hand, Revenue's contention, duly represented by learned ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the capital goods were removed in 2008, the differential duty as pointed out by the Revenue, was paid in 2010. In addition interest which is also in the nature of penal provision was also paid by the appellant. Show-cause notice for imposition of penalty was issued after a gap of 2 years i.e. 16.04.2012. This only reflects upon the uncertain mind of Revenue and is also hit by the provision of law ....