9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (7) TMI 1807X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . (AR) for the Respondent(s) ORDER The facts of the case in brief are that the appellant is engaged in the manufacture of MS Billets and Non Alloy Steel Ingots classifiable under Chapter 72 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 and is thus registered with the Central Excise Department. During the course of verification of the books of accounts of the Appellant for the period, 2013-14, it was al ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dy paid by the Appellant. On appeal, the ld. Commissioner (appeals) upheld the Order-in-Original. Hence, the present appeal before the Tribunal. 3. Shri M. Mohapatra, General Manager (Taxation) of the appellant Company appeared on behalf of the appellant, submits that the Appellant has already reversed the amount in dispute from their Cenvat register and the same was not utilised by the Appellant ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... regards imposition of penalty, I find that the disputed amount had been paid before the issuance of the show cause notice. Therefore, I am of the view that the payment of duty in the instant case before issuance of the show cause notice is a sufficient compliance. Additionally, the Revenue has not been able to prove beyond reasonable doubt the presence of fraud, collusion, willful misstatement or ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
