TMI Blog2014 (3) TMI 631X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... appellant had reversed the Cenvat credit on 04.12.2008, as soon as it was pointed out by the audit party. It is also on record that the said reversal was kept informed by the appellant to the authorities - there are various decisions of the Tribunal in the case of Emco Limited vs. CCE, Mumbai [2011 (6) TMI 567 - CESTAT, MUMBAI] and CEAT Limited vs. CCE, Mumbai [2011 (10) TMI 235 - CESTAT, MUMBAI], ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t, 1985. They are also availing cenvat credit on various inputs used in the manufacture of excisable goods under Rule 3 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002/ Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. During the course of scrutiny of the records/ documents, it was noticed that the appellant had availed the cenvat credit of Rs. 25,554/- on the basis of Xerox copy of bill of Entry. On being pointed out, the appellant h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in toto. 4. None appears on behalf of the appellant. The appellant has filed a written submission. The said written submission is taken on record and considered by passing this order. 5. Heard the learned departmental representative who reiterates the findings of the lower authorities. 6. After perusal of the record, I find that the issue to be decided in this case is regarding whether the a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bai 2011 (272) ELT 136 (Tri. Mum.) and CEAT Limited vs. CCE, Mumbai 2012 (275) ELT 433 (Tri. Mumbai), wherein it has been held that for demanding interest also, the revenue authorities have to issue the notice within period of limitation. In the case in hand, as reproduce above, the reversal was in 2008 while the show cause notice was issue in 2010, which according to me is blatantly time bared. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
