2018 (9) TMI 184

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Submission for Appellant Shri Mohd. Altaf (Asstt. Commr.) AR for Respondent ORDER Per : Archana Wadhwa Appellants have made a request to decide the matter on merits. Accordingly, we have gone through the impugned order and have heard learned A.R. 2. Demand of duty to the extent of Rs. 2,91,258/- stand confirmed against the appellant by invoking the longer period by way of issuance of show ca....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....y in the nature of manpower for doing the given work, was taxable under the category of 'Maintenance & Repair Services'. As such in the absence of any mala fide, the longer period of limitation was not available. He has relied upon the Tribunal decision in the case of M/s Lal Singh vs. Commissioner of Central Excise Final Order No.71153/2018 dated 25/05/2018. 4. Without going to the merits of the....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ted. The reasons and circumstances for invocation of the extended period as also for imposition of penalty under Section 78 are identical i.e. a mala fide mind. The appellate authority have already taken a view in favour of the assessee, in respect of penalty, it was not open to the appellate authority to hold to the contrary for invocation of longer period. Otherwise also we note that the appella....