Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / TMI Blogs / RSS

2026 (3) TMI 909

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the appeal of the Appellant and upheld the Order-in-Original. 2. Briefly stated facts of the present case are that the Appellant are engaged in the manufacture of excisable goods falling under Chapters 84 & 87 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. During the course of audit, it was observed that during the period from 17.03.2012 to 27.09.2013, the Appellant had cleared the capital goods without payment of central excise duty of Rs.1,48,318/- as applicable in terms of Rule 3(5A) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. On this allegation, a show cause notice dated 31.03.2017 was issued to the Appellant, which was adjudicated by the Adjudicating Authority vide Order-in-Original dated 27.02.2018, vide which demand of Rs.1,48,318/- was confirmed....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ry and figures of credit were taken from the returns/records of the Appellant. He further submits that the Appellant had intimated that the capital goods, on which credit was taken, are consumed and are not cleared from the factory of the Appellant; this fact is mentioned in the show cause notice, even then show cause notice was issued and demand was confirmed on presumption that the said capital goods were cleared as waste & scrap. He further submits that there is no evidence of any removal of such capital goods from the factory of the Appellant. 4.2 He further submits that prior to the impugned period, i.e. 17.03.2012 to 27.09.2013, and after the impugned period till date, the amount payable on the clearance of capital goods as waste &....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....hown in the returns and other documents, the show cause notice was issue. It is a settled law that extended period of limitation cannot be invoked on the basis of audit has held in the following cases: * Maruti Suzuki India Ltd - 2024 (4) TMI 724 CESTAT Chandigarh * Hoshiarpur Automobiles - 2024 (4) TMI 432 CESTAT Chandigarh * Sunshine Steel Industries - (2023) 8 Centax 209 (Tri. Del.) - affirmed by Hon'ble Supreme Court (2023) 8 Centax 210 (SC) Further, we find that the department has not been able to bring on record any evidence to establish that there was a suppression on the part of the Appellant with intent to evade payment of duty. Further, we also find that the provision of Rule 3(5A) of the Cenvat Credi....