2019 (12) TMI 621

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ssailed by the appellant in this forum. 2. Factual aspect of this case in brief is that appellant is a manufacturer of pharmaceutical products as well as trader. During the EA-2000 audit conducted by the officers of the Central Excise, Belapur Commissionerate in the appellant's concern, it was noticed that during the year 2008-09 appellant had rendered exempted services of trading for an amount of Rs. 1,34,59,909/- and had not maintained separate account as provided in the Rule 6(3) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 for which 8% of the value of exempted service was considered as due on the appellant. Show-cause notice was issued accordingly for recovery of Rs. 1,68,712/- from the appellant alongwith interest and proportionate penalty, mat....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Service Tax return is supposed to be taken into consideration for computation as per provision contained in Section 73(6) for the Finance Act, 1994 and since ST-3 return copy submitted by the appellant indicates that ST-3 return for the disputed period was filed on 22.04.2009, the show-cause notice was well issued within the period of limitation, for which interference by the Tribunal in the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) is uncalled for. 5. Perused the case record. As found from the show-cause notice and even in the Order-in-Original there was no Service Tax liability shown in the table that pertains to financial year 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 and the only Service Tax liability due against the appellant for the financial y....