9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (7) TMI 534X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... a Crishnan, Advocate, Shri M.N. Bharathi, Advocate For the Respondent ORDER Per Bench The appeal is filed by the department aggrieved by the order passed by Commissioner (Appeals) who set aside the demand for the extended period. 1. Brief facts are that the respondents are engaged in the manufacture and clearance of Aluminium Powder and are registered with the Central Excise Department to av ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd for imposing penalties. After due process of law, the original authority confirmed and ordered recovery of Rs. 10,92,631/- and imposed equal penalty. In appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals) set aside the demand for the extended period and thereby confirmed the demand only for the normal period. Accordingly the department is now before the Tribunal. 3. The Ld.AR, Sh.K.P.Muralidharan appearing for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ellant had reflected the credit availed in their accounts. An audit was conducted from 22.05.2006 to 24.05.2006 and 24.9.2007 to 27.9.2007. No objection was raised by audit party on the credit availed by the appellant. Therefore the department was fully aware about the availment of credit. That the Show cause notice issued invoking the extended period alleging suppression of facts cannot sustain a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ted the credit availed by them in the ST-3 returns filed. We therefore find no grounds to interfere in the impugned order. The Ld.Counsel has submitted that the cross objection filed by them is not pressed. Therefore the impugned order calls for no interference. The appeal filed by the department is dismissed.
(Operative part of the order pronounced in open court) X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
