2014 (5) TMI 333

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Archana Wadhwa: As per facts on record, the appellants are engaged in the manufacture of non-ferrous extrusions, rods, pipes, tubes and profile sections falling under Chapter 74 of the Central Excise Tariff Act 1975. They were procuring their raw material from two registered dealers M/s. Yash Industries and M/s. Agarwal Products and based upon the cenvatable invoices issued by said two dealers, .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... confirming the demand to the extent of Rs.4,27,007/- by denying them the benefit of Cenvat credit availed during the period November 2003 to October, 2007. An identical amount was also imposed as penalty. The said order of the original adjudicating authority was upheld by Commissioner (Appeals). 4. The appellant's contention, duly represented by advocate Shri Hemant Bajaj, is that there is no di .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the sides, I find that the revenues entire case is based upon the investigation conducted at the end of M/s. Sulabh Impex Corpn on the ground that it has passed the Cenvat credit to the registered dealer on the basis of fake bill of entries and the registered dealer has further passed on credit to the appellants. The identical investigation at the end of M/s. Sulabh Impex Corpn and the consequent .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ed the fact of having knowledge about non-payment of duty by M/s. Sulabh Impex Corpn. Transporters billty indicating receipt of inputs stand produced by them. In such a case, the declaration of law of Luxmi Metal Industries is fully applicable to the facts of the present case. 8. The Tribunal in the case of CC & CE Kanpur vs Juhi Alloys [2013 (296) ELT 533 (Tri-Del)] has held that Cenvat credit c .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ue, there is no malafide on the part of the present appellant, in which case no suppression or misstatement can be attributed to him justifying the invokation of longer period. As such, I hold the demand to be barred by limitation also. 10. In view of the above, the impugned order is set aside and appeal allowed with consequential relief to the appellant. (Pronounced in the open Court on)
Ca .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X