TMI Blog2017 (8) TMI 999X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... long to the same assesse, their admissibility to the credit is required to be adjudged in the light of the above decision of the Tribunal, for which purpose I set aside the impugned order and remand the matter to the original adjudicating authority. Extended period of limitation - two SCNs stand issued on 23.03.2015 pertains to the period April 2011 to December 2014 and the third SCN dated 18.01.2016 pertains to the period January 2015 to October 2015. As such, all the three SCNs stand issued by invoking the extended period of limitation - Held that: - the extended period was not available to the Revenue, however, a part of the demand also falls within the limitation period. As the matter is being remanded, the adjudicating authority wou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... resulting in passing of order by the original adjudicating authority. In as much as while confirming the demands, penalty imposed upon the appellant by the original adjudicating authority was not equal to the confirmation of demand, Revenue also filed appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals). The appellate authority disposed of the appeal filed by the assesse as also by the Revenue, rejecting the assessee's appeal and allowing the Revenue's appeal by increasing the penalty to the total tax confirmed against them. 3. After hearing both sides, I find the denial of Cenvat credit is on the sole ground that the input services were utilized by Unit-II III who were not registered with the department under Central Excise, though, as p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e three SCNs stand issued by invoking the extended period of limitation. Admittedly, credit was availed by the appellant by reflecting the same in their statutory records. The Tribunal in the case of CCE, Indore Vs. Mdicaps Ltd. - 2011 (24) STR 572 (Tri.-Del.) has held that where the credit is availed by an assessee in the statutory records, they cannot be held guilty of any suppression or mis-statement, in the absence of any evidence to show such malafide. Reference can also be made to the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Medi Extrusions Ltd. Vs. CCE, Noida - 2014 (302) ELT 308 (Tri.-Del.) and in the case of Asian Tubes Ltd. Vs. CCE, Ahmedabad - 2011 (21) STR 58 (Tri.-Ahmd.) laying down that when there is no requirement of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
