9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (2) TMI 1036X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Revenue Request for adjournment for the Revenue ORDER Per Mrs. Archana Wadhwa: Being aggrieved with the order passed by Commissioner(Appeals), Revenue has filed the present appeal. 2. We have heard Shri Mohd. Altaf, learned Asstt. Commr.(A.R.) for the Revenue. Respondents made a request for adjournment, but keeping in view the settled issue, we reject the said request and proceed to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eing pointed out, the party reversed an amount of Rs. 12,38,159/- along with interest of Rs. 1,56,577/- being cenvat credit taken on the input services, in view of the provisions of the said notification No.01/2006-ST dated 01.03.2006. 4. However, SCN was issued to the party for demand of service tax amounting to Rs. 48,21,027/- along with penalty for the period October 2008 to March 2011 on the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ppeals). 6. Reliance has been placed by the Commissioner(Appeals) on the case of CWC Vs. Commissioner of ST Ahmedabad, 2016(41) STR (Tri-Ahmd), Sainik Security Services vs. CCE, Allahabad, 2016 (41) STR 159 (Tri.-All) and Johnson Mathey Chemicals India (P) Ltd. Vs. CCE Kanpur, 2014 (34) STR (Tri-Del) to hold that extended period of limitation is not invokable. 7. On going through the impugned or ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
