TMI Blog2018 (10) TMI 466X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... TMI 165 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT], the Hon’ble High Court has dismissed the Department appeal filed against the Order of CESTAT where the Bangalore Bench of the Tribunal had without going into the merits of the matter, set aside the impugned Order therein solely on the ground of limitation. Since the assessee has not challenged the legality of the duty demand, it is not necessary to give a finding on the invocation of extended period of limitation. This is because if the plea of the appellant is accepted then that may lead to an anomalous situation where the appellant having paid the duty without challenging the assessment order, would be heard praying to quash the assessment order indirectly on the ground of technicalities. Penalty - H ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n the Order-in-Original dated 13.06.2017 in relation to which interest and penalty were also levied. The appellant did not meet with success on appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals-II), Chennai and therefore, is in appeal before this forum. 3. Heard Shri. G. Derrick, Ld. Advocate appearing for the assessee and Shri. R. Subramaniyan, Ld. DR appearing for the Revenue. Admittedly, the appeal challenges only the invocation of extended period of limitation by the Revenue. 4. I have considered the rival contentions, perused the documents placed on record and have also gone through the various decisions relied on by the Ld. Advocate. The appellant, in response to the Show Cause Notice, has replied that it admitted the fact that CENVAT Cre ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... a-II 2013 (292) E.L.T. 513 (Tri. Ahmd.) after following the above decision of the Hon ble High Court of Karnataka, has set aside the demand of interest and imposition of penalty and it has been observed by the Bench that it was a fit case wherein interest liability fastened on the appellant and the equivalent amount of penalty imposed under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act was required to be set aside. I note that since the assessee has not challenged the legality of the duty demand, it is not necessary to give a finding on the invocation of extended period of limitation. This is because if the plea of the appellant is accepted then that may lead to an anomalous situation where the appellant having paid the duty without challengin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
