2022 (2) TMI 450

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....o various noticee as co noticee holding as follow: "IN RESPECT OF SHOW CAUSE NOTICE F. NO. V-CH-74 /ADJ / 2006 DATED 26.9.2006 ISSUED BY SHILLONG COMMISSIONER : 1.1 to 1.10 ...... 2 to 6. ......... B. IN RESPECT OF 62 INDIVIDUAL SHOW CAUSE NOTICES ISSUED BY DGCEI MUMBAI/ DELHI 1. I hold that cenvat credit as indicated in column (4) fraudulently availed by each of the noticees is inadmissible under the provisions CENVAT Credit Rules, 2002/2004 and determine the demand, in terms of then Section 11A(2) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (now Section 11A(10) of Central Excise Act, 1944) read with provisions of Rule 12 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002 /Rule 14 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 made in the show cause notice (indicated in column 2) ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....conoticee(s) Duty determi ned to be payable Penalty under Secti on 11A C read with Rule 13(2 )/15 (2) Pena lty unde r Rule 13(1 )/15( 1) Penalt y under Rule 26 Duty paid approp riated 1- 18                 19 DGCEI/MZ U/I&IS'C'/1 2(4)25/200 4/Pt-XVII dated 12.01.2017 J&J Precisions Inds 606780 606780 0 0 0 606780 Shri Joit Kumar Jain         10000   20- 62                 All the noticees mentioned at (A) and( B) above are at liberty to avail of the benefit of reduced penalty in terms of first and second proviso to Section 11AC of Central Excise A....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... proceeding is now before the Commissioner, Palghar. 3.1 We have considered the impugned order along with the submissions made in appeal and during the course of argument. 3.2 We find, as submitted by both the sides, that tribunal has vide its order No 194/13/EB/C-II date 29.01.2013, held as follows: "10. We have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel and examined the record. On examination of the record, we find that the main grievance of the appellant, MMPL, is that neither the replies of co-noticees were supplied to them nor the cross-examination as asked by them is given to them and these grounds have been taken by them before the Hon'ble High Court of Guwahati in writ petition, who also directed the adjudicating aut....