Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2009 (10) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2009 (10) TMI 697 - AT - Central ExciseCENVAT credit - Rule 6(3)(b) of CCR - the appellants neither maintained separate accounts in respect of the exempted finished goods nor kept the department informed about the clearance of the exempted goods - extended period of limitation - Held that: - it is well known that the department has a regular programme of audit, under which different units are audited according to the frequency laid down, for example, a bigger unit having more transactions and paying more revenue is audited more frequently, say, once in 6 months. It cannot be a case of anybody that since all the excisable units are being audited by the department from time to time, the extended period of limitation will not apply in respect of any unit. Such an interpretation would render the relevant legal provision regarding application of extended period of time totally redundant and hence cannot be accepted. The appellants did not maintain separate accounts of receipt, consumption and inventory of inputs which were used in the manufacture of dutiable final products as well as exempted goods removed to its sister concern without payment of duty. There is also no evidence on record to support the claim of the appellants that it had submitted particulars of removal of exempted goods to the department. Appeal dismissed - decided against appellant.
|