Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2018 (4) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (4) TMI 1389 - AT - Central ExciseCENVAT credit - input services - construction services - extended period of limitation - Held that: - the appellate authority has upheld the extended period on the short ground that the details of the services in respect of which the credit was availed has not been reflected in ER 1 return and no document/ invoices stand given by the assessee - as is seen from the above observations of the appellate authority himself, no documents are required to be submitted by the assessee after 1996. If there is no legal obligation on the part of the assessee to do a particular act, non observation of that procedure / act cannot be held to be violative of law - If the law does not require documents / invoices, non submission of the same by an assessee is in accordance with the law and cannot be held to be a suppression or mis-statement, with an intent to evade payment of duty, thus justifying the invocation of longer period of limitation. The appellant have admittedly filed ER 1 returns declaring the quantum of credit availed by them and the Revenue had not taken action for a period of more than 2 to 3 years and issued the show cause notice only subsequently in January,2016 - In the absence of any positive action on the part of the assessee to suppress the material facts from the Revenue, with a guilty mind, extended period cannot be held to be applicable. Appeal allowed on limitation.
|