TMI Blog2019 (5) TMI 1402X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e the same is upheld. Penalty - HELD THAT:- The demand was raised for the extended period as there is suppression of facts on the part of the appellant therefore, in terms of decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of UOI vs. Dharamendra Textile Processors [2008 (9) TMI 52 - SUPREME COURT] , even though the amount is paid before issuance of show cause notice as per the proviso to Se ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... MESH NAIR The appellant have two divisions, one division is availing exemption under Notification No. 30/2004-CE however, availing Cenvat credit on the common input services which is used for both the divisions. The case of the department is that, since the common input service on which the credit was availed was used in dutiable and exempted final products, proportionate credit a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e 14 cannot be demanded. 3. Shri S.K. Shukla, Ld. Superintendent (AR) appearing on behalf of the Revenue reiterates the findings of the impugned order. He submits that since the demand was raised for the extended period as there was suppression of facts, equal amount of penalty imposed under Section 11AC cannot be waived or reduced. 4. After hearing both the sides a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... credit has been taken wrongly but not utilised, the same shall be recovered from the manufacturer or the provider of output service, as the case may be, and the provisions of section 11A of the Excise Act or section 73 of the Finance Act, 1994 (32 of 1994), as the case may be, shall apply mutatis mutandis for effecting such recoveries; (ii) Where the CENVAT credit has been taken and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
