TMI Blog2017 (1) TMI 1126X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... applicable in the present case. The impugned show cause notice is not sustainable - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - E/50072/2015-EX[SM] - A/71187/2016-SM[BR] - Dated:- 16-12-2016 - Mr. ANIL G. SHAKKARWAR, MEMBER (TECHNICAL) Shri Ravinder Singh, Consultant for the appellant. Shri D.K. Deb, Asstt. Commr. (A.R.) for the Department Per Mr. Anil G. Shakkarwar The present appeal is against the Order-in-Appeal No.NOI/EXCUS/000/APPL/159/2014-15 dated 19.09.2014. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the appellants are manufacturers of Plastic Molded Items. The officers of Central Excise Department inspected the manufacturing unit of the appellant on 28.06.2012, their registered office, residence ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r invoices, and, therefore there was no contravention of any rules requiring confiscation of the said goods. They further contended that the some of the goods were semi finished and they were not still complete and not reached the stage where they were required to be entered in daily stock account register and therefore they were not liable for confiscation. They further contented that they had not taken any Cenvat Credit on any of the inputs and therefore the question of invocation of Rule 15 of Cenvat Credit Rules did not arrive. The Original Authority could not appreciate the argument put forth and adjudicated the matter through Order-in-Original No. 52/ADC/NOIDA/2013-14 dated 13.02.2014 and ordered for confiscation of the said goods val ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... se Rules, 2002 and Rule 15 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. He further contended that there was no allegation in the show cause notice of any irregularity in respect of availment of Cenvat Credit, therefore, they were not liable for imposition of any penalty under Rule 15 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. He further contended that the provisions of Rule 25 of Central Excise Rules, 2002 are subject to the provisions of Section 11AC of Central Excise Act, 1944 and that there was no allegation in the show cause notice about evasion of duty, therefore, invocation of Rule 25 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 is not sustainable. Therefore, show cause notice itself does not survive. In support of his argument he has relied on ruling by Hon'ble High C ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
