2018 (7) TMI 1709

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....) Shri Pawan Kumar Singh (Supdt.) AR for Revenue Shri B. L. Narasimhan (Advocate) & Shri Utkarsh Malviya (Advocate) for Assessee ORDER Per: Ashok Jindal Both sides are in appeal against the impugned order. 2. As both the appeals are against the impugned order, therefore, both the appeals are decided by a common order. 3. The facts of the case are that assessee is manufacturer ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....duty was confirmed along with interest. The Adjudicating Authority imposed penalty of Rs. 1 crore under Rule 25 of Central Excise Rules, 2002. Against the said order both sides are in appeal. The revenue is in appeal for enhancement of penalty and the assessee in appeal for setting aside the demand of duty. 4. The learned counsel for the appellant submits that parts were cleared in plastic bins....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....mits that the activity of packing is not known to the department and came to know at the time of investigation, therefore, the extended period of limitation is rightly invoked. 6. Heard the parties and considered the submission. 7. We find that in this case if it is held that activity undertaken by the assessee as the manufacture then assessee is entitled to avail Cenvat credit of Rs. 26.11 ....