TMI Blog2015 (2) TMI 919X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... against the earlier show cause notice was set aside as time barred, thus, the demand of duty for the extended period of limitation, on the same facts in the present show cause notice cannot be sustained. The findings of the Tribunal in the appellant s own case for the earlier period would be squarely applicable in the present case. Hence, demand of CENVAT Credit to the extent of ₹ 11,92,39 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was used captively as well as to other units in the same premises. A show cause notice dt.10.09.2007 was issued proposing to disallow CENVAT Credit of ₹ 12,00,552.00 along with interest and penalties on the Furnace oil used in generation of electricity cleared to other units during the period from April 2003 to November 2003. The adjudicating authority confirmed the demand of CENVAT Credit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... de as time barred by the Tribunal vide Final Order No.A/877-882/WZB/AHD/2012, dt.04.06.12. He submits that an amount of ₹ 8,158.00 out of ₹ 12,00,552.00, is relating to denial of CENVAT Credit on the ground that the documents were not in the name of the company. He submits that they are not contesting the demand of ₹ 8,158.00. 3.On the other hand, ld.Authorised Representati ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1 to March 2003. It is surprising to note that this period is also included in the Show Cause Notice dt.28.04.2004 while confirming demand of reversal of CENVAT Credit of ₹ 50,79,458/-, which was decided as hit by limitations in assessee s favour. Be that as it may, the Show Cause Notice dt.12.08.2005 is belatedly time barred, inasmuch as the very same issue was in question in the earlier S ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 394.00 along with interest and penalty is set aside is barred by limitation. In so far as demand of CENVAT Credit of ₹ 8,158.00 along with interest and penalty is upheld. Penalty imposed on the appellant No.2 cannot be sustained. Accordingly, appeal filed by the appellant No.2 is allowed with consequential relief. Application for extension of stay order is disposed of. (Dictated Pron ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
