9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (3) TMI 1124X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dent Per Ashok Jindal: The appellant is in appeal against the impugned order for denial of Cenvat credit on CVD paid by the appellant on imported coal. 2. The facts of the case are that the appellant is engaged in the manufacture of aluminium ingots and aluminium billets. They were availing Cenvat credit of duty paid on inputs and capital goods and service tax paid on inputs services used in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... set of facts, a show cause notice was issued to the appellant for the period June 2012 to December 2012 on 5.12.2016 by invoking extended period of limitation to deny Cenvat credit to the appellant. The matter was adjudicated, Cenvat credit was denied. Against the said order, the appellant is before me. 3. The ld. Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant submits that Notification No. 12/2012 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Rule 3 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. Therefore, the authorities below have mis-understood the provisions of Cenvat Credit Rules. He further submitted that if the correct Rule is applied, the appellant is entitled to avail Cenvat credit. The demand has been raised due to misunderstanding of the Rule 3 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. He also agitated that it is an issue of applying wrongly provisions ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o the appellant. In that circumstances, I hold that the appellant has correctly availed the Cenvat credit of CVD paid on imported coal in terms of Rule 3 (7) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. Further, I find that the show cause notice has been issued by invoking extended period of limitation. As the Revenue itself has applied wrong provisions of law, therefore, the extended period of limitation is not ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
