2024 (3) TMI 281

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Ankur Upadhyay, Advocate Present for the Respondent: Mr. Rakesh Kumar, Authorised Representative ORDER Present appeal has been filed to assail the order in appeal bearing No.232-17-18 dated 26.09.2017. The facts relevant for the present adjudication, in brief, are as follows:- The appellants are engaged in manufacture of excisable goods. They are also registered under the provisions of Financ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e penalties. The proposal was initially confirmed vide Order-in-Original No.226 of 2016-17 dated 14th March, 2017. The appeal against the said order has been dismissed vide the order under challenge. Being aggrieved, the appellant is before this Tribunal. 2. We have heard Shri Ankur Upadhyaya, ld. Counsel for the appellant and Mr. Rakesh Kumar, ld. Authorised Representative for the Revenue. 3. L....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d of limitation. The case has been made out from the appellants own document. Neither suppression nor any misrepresentation can be alleged against the appellant. Ld. Counsel has relied upon the following decisions :- 1. Collector of Central Excise vs. Chemphar Drugs & Liniments reported as 1989 (40) ELT 276 (S.C.) 2. Pahwa Chemicals Private Limited vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Delhi rep....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ount on which the demand in question has been confirmed is apparently and admittedly an amount in lieu of sale of finished goods manufactured by the appellant, that too, on the account of delay in receiving the payment from the buyers thereof. From no stretch of imagination, the said amount can be connected to be an amount towards rendering any service, not even the declared service. The amount is....