TMI Blog2017 (1) TMI 1075X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e of SCN - the SCN in the instant case issued by invocation of proviso to Section 11A ibid is not sustainable in law - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - E/3232/2009-EX[DB] - A/71202/2016-EX[DB] - Dated:- 29-12-2016 - MR. (Dr.) SATISH CHANDRA, PRESIDENT AND MR. ANIL G. SHAKKARWAR, MEMBER (TECHNICAL) Shri Atul Gupta, Advocate for the Appellant. Shri Pawan Kumar Singh, Supdt. (A.R.) for the Department Per Anil G. Shakkarwar : The present appeal is filed against the Order-in-Appeal No. 238/CE/APPL/NOIDA/09 dated 31.08.2009 passed by Commissioner (Appeals), Customs Central Excise, Noida. 2. The appellants are engaged in the manufacture of plastic moulded parts of four wheelers, TV cabinets etc. They ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oulds was exhausted in such process and therefore there was no need to load assessable value of spares. They also contended that the extended period of limitation was not applicable in the present case. The Original Authority did not appreciate the arguments putforth and confirmed the demand and ordered recovery of ₹ 4,54,933/-, 5,572/ 49,527/- and imposed penalty and appropriated the amount already paid. Aggrieved by the said order appellant preferred appeal before Commissioner (Appeals). Commissioner (Appeals) decided appeal through Order-in-Appeal No. 238/2009 dated 31.08.2009. The Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the impugned Order-in-Original but for the modification of the demand and penalty amount on credit of service tax paid on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mission cannot be a ground to invoke proviso to said Section 11A especially when the evasion came to the notice of the department when the audit was conducted 22 months before the date of issue of show cause notice. 4. Heard learned D.R. for the Revenue who has supported the impugned Order-in-Appeal. 5. Having considered the rival contentions, we find that ruling of the Hon'ble High Court at Allahabad in the said case of C.C.E. S.T. vs. Triveni Engineering Industries Ltd. is squarely applicable in the present case. Therefore, we find force in the argument putforth by the learned counsel for the appellant. For the said reasons, the show cause notice in the instant case issued by invocation of proviso to Section 11A ibid is no ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
