9911796707
Advanced Search 
TMI Blog2009 (5) TMI 144X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... espondent. [Order]. - In this appeal of the assessee, the challenge is mainly against the demand of an amount of Rs. 3,46,606/- confirmed against them under Rule 12 of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2002 read with Rule 6(3)(b) of the said rules by the lower appellate authority. The demand is for the period from January, 2002 to March, 2003. The show cause notice raising this demand was issued on 29-11- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... intain separate accounts in respect of such inputs, a pert of which was used in the manufacture of dutiable goods and the rest used in the manufacture of the job worked goods. It was also noted that the appellant had taken CENVAT credit on these inputs. In this factual scenario, Rule 6(3)(b) and Rule 12 were invoked for recovery of 8% of the price of the job worked goods as also for imposing penal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... imed good case for the Revenue. 3. After giving careful consideration to the submissions, I am inclined to dispose of this case on the aforesaid ground. The show-cause notice, which was issued by the Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise, Thaloga Division, dismally reflects his ignorance of law. He considered the aforesaid amount of Rs. 3,46,606/- as 'duty of excise' and apparently on th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e 11A should mutatis mutandis be followed. Where the amount to be recovered is for a period beyond the normal period of limitation, it is necessary that the ingredients for invoking the longer period of limitation under Section 11A should be alleged in the show-cause notice and established by the Revenue. The show-cause notice in question, which has been perused carefully, does not mention any of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
