TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (12) TMI 769
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... company is engaged in manufacturing of MS Ingot falling under Chapter Heading 7206 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. They are holding Central Excise Registration and are availing CENVAT Credit in respect of inputs used in the manufacture of final products. A Show Cause cum Demand Notice dated 07.11.2014 was issued to the Appellant and its Director alleging wrong availment of CENVAT Credit on MS Round Cutting during the period from December 2012 to January 2013 amounting to Rs.7,64,588/-. It is the case of the Department that the said MS Round Cutting had actually not been received in the Appellants' factory and had not been utilized for manufacturing of their finished goods. It was alleged that the aforesaid goods were claimed to be ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....overable along with interest under Rule 14 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 read with Section 11AA of the Central Excise Act, 1944; (ii) I also disallow the irregular input service credit of Rs.2,037/- (Service Tax Rs.1,978/-, Education Cess Rs.40/- and Secondary & Higher Education Cess Rs.19/-) (Rupees Two thousand thirty-seven) only, irregularly availed and utilized by the Noticee No.1 on input service (on GTA) during the period from March'10 to June'12, as detailed in the Show Cause Notice No.176/ADC/BOL/14 dated 07.11.2014, which is inadmissible and the same is recoverable along with interest under Rule 14 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 read with Section 11AA of the Central Excise A....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....;Appellants' factory and submitted documents in support of transport and receipt of payment (freight). He also submitted that the disputed goods were procured on payment through banking channels and entered in RG-23A part-I and the inputs were issued for manufacture of dutiable final products. He vehemently argued that there is no allegation of any flow-back and there is no inculpatory statement brought on record to substantiate receipt of Cenvatable invoices without receipt of goods thereto. 5. Ld.Authorized Representative appearing for the Department justified the impugned orders and prayed that the Appeal be dismissed being devoid any merits. 6. Heard both sides and perused the Appeal re....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....gistered with the Department and there is no allegation in the impugned order of non-submission of any periodical returns. The Appellant is subject to regular audits. Therefore, the allegation of suppressing the facts from the Department does not hold good in the event of periodic audits of the Appellant's records. There is no other evidence in the impugned order to show that the Appellant has willfully suppressed the fact from the Department in order to evade payment of duty. As such, extended period of limitation cannot be invoked in the present case. In this case it is a fact on record that during the course of investigation, no shortage or excess of the goods were found in the premises o....