TMI Blog2012 (7) TMI 603X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the duty - demand for the period April 2003 to Jun3 2004 set aside Cenvat credit paid on furnace oil – demand for the reversal of CENVAT Credit on the furnace oil consumed for the clearance of steam to their sister concerns - For the period July 2004 to February 2005 - Show Cause Notice was issued on 28.7.2005 – Held that:- SCN is within the period of limitation and on merit – against assessee Cenvat credit paid on furnace oil - demand for the reversal of CENVAT Credit on the furnace oil consumed for the clearance of steam to their sister concerns - Show Cause Notice is issued on 12.08.2005 for the period December 2001 to March 2003 – Held that:- Show Cause Notice dt.12.08.2005 is belatedly time barred, inasmuch as the very same issu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 26.07.05 28.07.05 14,96,973 8,30,251 E/248/06 KS/268/Daman/2006, dt.21.8.06 Dec 01-Mar 03 12.08.05 15,60,624 E/249/06 KS/269/Daman/2006, dt.21.8.06 Mar 05-15.5.05 13.01.06 4,07,830 2. The relevant facts, in brief, that arise for consideration are that the respondent herein purchased furnace oil and used as fuel in the manufacture of final product by availing CENVAT Credit of the duty paid on such furnace oil. The respondents used part quantity of the said furnace oil for generation of steam, which is exempted f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , in Appeal No.E/3627/2004, vide Final Order No.A.443/2009/ WZB/AHD, dt.5.2.09. It is his submission that the Revenue aggrieved by such an order of the Tribunal, had preferred an appeal before Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad only on the ground that the extended period of limitation should have been invoked. It is his submission that the Hon'ble High Court held in favour of the assessee and rejected the appeal filed by the Revenue. He would take us through the issue involved in that case along with the Show Cause Notice issued in that case to the assessee and submits that the said Show Cause Notice was dated 28.04.2004 for the demand of reversal of CENVAT Credit for the period April 2000 to March 2003. It is his submission ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ders to the extent of setting aside of the demand for the period April 2003 to Jun3 2004. 7.1 As regards the demand in this order-in-appeal for the period July 2004 to February 2005, we find that the Show Cause Notice was issued on 28.7.2005. During this relevant period, Show Cause Notice can be issued within a period of one year for the recovery of wrongly availed CENVAT Credit. We find that the Show Cause Notice dt.28.7.2005 for the demand of reversal of amount of CENVAT Credit on the furnace oil used for manufacturing of steam supplied to sister concerns during the period July 2004 to February 2005 is correctly issued and is within the period of limitation and on merit, the issue stand decided against the assessee by Hon'ble Hig ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e appellant, the impugned order in this case needs to be set aside and the demand of confirmation of duty as proposed in the Show Cause Notice dt.13.01.2006 needs to be upheld along with interest and we do so. The impugned order to that extent is set aside. 10. Now, we come to the imposition of penalty on the appellant for the period wherein we have upheld the confirmation of demand within limitation. We find that the appellant has been under the bonafide belief that he need not reverse CENVAT Credit used for the purpose of manufacturing of steam which is supplied to their sister concern, till the issue was decided against them by the Tribunal on 05.02.2009. We hold that in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, the appellan ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
