2025 (10) TMI 328

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....manufacturer of "Oil paint and varnish, Primer, Epoxide Resin, Putti and Sealing compound". The appellant is registered manufacturer and availing Cenvat credit on capital goods, inputs as well as on input services and paid central excise duty at normal rate after availing full exemption of 150 Lakhs dated 01.03.2003 as amended and filing their ER-3 returns regularly. 3. During the course of audit and examination of ER-3 returns filed by the appellant for the quarter January 2017 to March 2017 and April 2017 to June 2017, it was found that appellant opted to avail benefit of full exemption of 150 Lakhs up to the month of February 2017 as provided under SSI exemption notification dated 01.03.2003 as amended and thereafter they opted to ava....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....), Central Excise & CGST, Indore, Final Order No. 50272/2025 dated 04.02.2025. He also relied upon the decision of this Tribunal in the case of M/s. Nalwa Steel and Power Ltd. Vs. CCE & ST, Raipur reported in 2016 (8) TMI 632 CESTAT New Delhi. 5. On the other hand, learned Departmental Representative supported the impugned order and submitted that as show cause notice has been issued on the basis of audit conducted in the Year 2020, therefore the limitation of 5 years is applicable to the facts of the case. 6. Hear both the parties and considered the submissions. 7. It is a fact on record that appellant is registered with the Central Excise Department and filing their ER-3 returns regularly showing availment of Cenvat credit in the....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d by the appellant itself will show that there is no suppression of fact and the credit is bonafidely taken in terms of their understanding of the legal provision. She also relied on certain decided cases to support the claim that any detection by routine audit cannot result in demand for invoking extended period alleging fraud etc. 3. Heard both the sides and examined the appeal records. Examining the question of time bar it is seen that the appellants availed the disputed credits during April 2009 to September 2010. These credits were reflected in all their records and statutory returns filed with the Department. The credit was found to be ineligible upon scrutiny by the officers of audit. The allegation of fraud, suppression, wi....