TMI Blog2014 (2) TMI 583X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by the Assistant Commissioner was vide order dated 02/04/2012 whereas the appellant had reversed the excess credit taken in July, 2011 itself. Therefore, in terms of the conditions of sub-para 2C, the appellant is not prima facie liable to pay any interest nor the appellant liable to any penalty. Therefore, the appellant has made out a strong case in their favour for grant of stay - Stay granted. - E/88201/2013 - Stay Order No. S/1171/2013-WZB/C-II(EB) - Dated:- 4-11-2013 - P R Chandrasekharan And Anil Choudhary, JJ. For the Appellant : Mr M H Patil, Adv. For the Respondent : Ms D M Durando Mumbai Dy. Commissioner (AR) PER : P R Chandrasekharan The appeal and stay application are directed against Order-in-Appeal No.BPS/60 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Ref/298 dated 02/04/2012 wherein the adjudicating authority determined the credit taken under clause (e) of sub-paragraph 2C of the Notification and appropriated the amount already reversed by the appellant. He also demanded interest of Rs.3,195/- on the said excess credit taken under Section 11AB of the Central Excise Act, 1944 and also imposed an equivalent amount of penalty under Section 11AC. 2.1 Aggrieved of the same the appellant preferred an appeal before the lower appellate authority who dismissed the appeal. Hence, the appellant is before us. 3. The learned counsel for the appellant submits that as per Notification No.56/2002, time-limit has been laid down in sub-para 2C with respect to taking of the credit, reversal of the exc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y the jurisdictional Assistant Commissioner of the refund due to the appellant and so on. As per these conditions, the appellant is required to reverse the credit of the excess amount taken within 5 days from the date of date of determination by the Assistant Commissioner. In the instant case, the determination by the Assistant Commissioner was vide order dated 02/04/2012 whereas the appellant had reversed the excess credit taken in July, 2011 itself. Therefore, in terms of the conditions of sub-para 2C, the appellant is not prima facie liable to pay any interest nor the appellant liable to any penalty. Therefore, the appellant has made out a strong case in their favour for grant of stay. Accordingly, we grant waiver from pre-deposit of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
