9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (9) TMI 835X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ta, wherein he has confirmed the demand of Rs. 68,60,128/- along with interest, on account of non-inclusion of VAT realized from the customers in the assessable value. The demand has been confirmed by invoking the extended period of limitation. The ld. adjudicating authority also imposed a penalty of Rs.68,60,128/- under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944. Aggrieved against the impugned order, the Appellant has filed this appeal. 2. In their grounds of appeal, the Appellant submits that the Hon'ble Supreme Court has decided the issue in the matter of Super Synotex (India) Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Jaipur II, reported in 2014 (301) E.L.T. 273 wherein it has been held that the sales tax concession retained by the ass ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... reported in 2014 (301) ELT 273, wherein it has been held that the sales tax concession retained by the assessees is required to be added in the assessable value for the purpose of levy of Central Excise duty. He also justified the penalty imposed. Accordingly, he prayed for dismissing the appeal filed by the Appellant. 4. Heard both sides and perused the appeal records. 5. We observe that the ld. adjudicating authority has passed the Order-in-Original dated 24.09.2014, wherein he confirmed the demand of Rs.60,68,128/- along with interest, by invoking the extended period of limitation. In their submission, the Appellant submits that they agree for the payment of duty for the normal period of limitation and accordingly prayed for setting as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y invoking the extended period is liable to be set aside. 8. Further, we observe that Board has issued Circular No. 1063/2/2018-CX dated 16.02.2018, clarifying acceptance of some of the orders passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, High Courts, etc., wherein no review petition has been filed. The paragraph 12 of the said Circular relevant to this appeal is reproduced below: "Decision of the Hon'ble High Court of Punjab & Haryana dated 12.08.2016 in the case of Microtek Forgings CEANo. 32/2016 [2016-TIOL-1866-HC-P&H-CX].12.1 Department has accepted the order of the Hon'ble High Court where the Hon'ble Court replying on the judgment of the Apex Court in the matters of 'Maruti Suzuki India Ltd. vs. CCE Delhi, 2014(307) ELT 625(SC)and Super Sy ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Accordingly, by following the above Circular issued by the Board, we hold that extended period is not invokable in this case and for the same reason, penalty under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944 is also not imposable. 9. In view of the above discussion, we partially allow the appeal filed by the Appellant and dispose of the appeal on the following terms : (i) The Appellant is liable to pay duty along with interest for the normal period of limitation. The demand confirmed by invoking the extended period of limitation is set aside. (ii) The penalty imposed under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944 is set aside. 10. The appeal is disposed of on the above terms, with consequential relief, if any, as per law. ( Ope ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
