2020 (6) TMI 552

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....for the Appellant Shri Rajeev Gupta and H.S.Brar, Authorised Representatives for the Respondent ORDER PER ASHOK JINDAL: The appellant is in appeal against the impugned order wherein the demand of duty has been confirmed against the appellant on the ground of denial of self-credit by denying the benefit of exemption Notification No.01/2010-CE dt.6.2.2010 to the appellant. 2. The facts of the c....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....wed the exemption. But the said order was challenged before the Commissioner (Appeals) who held that the appellant has invested Rs. 161.13 lakhs resulting in a substantial expansion of 24.46%. Therefore, there is a shortfall by 3.54 lakh, the benefit of exemption notification was denied. Consquent to that impugned order, the show cause notices were issued to the appellant to deny self credit taken....