TMI Blog2009 (9) TMI 861X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... for staying the operation of the impugned order of Commissioner (Appeals), we proceed to decide the appeal itself inasmuch as the issue lies in a narrow compass. 2. Respondents are engaged in the manufacture of plastic jerry cans on job work basis out of the raw materials supplied by the principal manufacturer under the cover of challans issued in terms of Notification No. 214/86-Central Excise ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... we reproduce Para 8 of the said order :- 8. Regarding the demand of the period upto Dec., 2005 being time barred, I find that as the records for the said period was audited by the department in the year 2006 and when Revenue Para-1 of the Audit Report No. 312/2005-06 dated 7-3-2006 clearly points out that the appellant were doing job work for various oil manufacturers and were asked to reverse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n invoked, penalty under Section 11AC is not imposable. However, as the appellant has contravened the rules made thereunder and violated the conditions of Notification No. 214/86-C.E., I find that the appellant is liable for penalty u/r 25 of the CER, 2002. 3. As against the above, the Revenue has contended in their grounds of appeal, that the audit Para was for the general reversal of Cenvat c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... reverse the credit. Otherwise also we note that the respondent are working on job work basis under the cover of challans issued by the principal manufacturer and cannot be expected to know that the goods manufactured by them are going to be used by the principal manufacturer for dutiable or exempted products. There being no specific allegation made in the Revenue s appeal referring to any positive ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
