2018 (7) TMI 332 – CESTAT KOLKATA – TMI – Benefit of SSI Exemption – Irregular availment of CENVAT credit – Principles of natural justice – Held that:- The Commissioner (Appeals) by the impugned order observed that the appellants were not entitled to receive the benefit of small scale exemption without refuting the figures as mentioned in the adjudication order – It appears that the Commissioner (Appeals) passed the order without examining the records at length and therefore, such an order cannot sustain in the eye of law – Apparently, the adjudicating authority had given the detailed finding with examination of records and documents which has not been refuted by the department and such order is to be restored.
–
Appeal allowed – decid
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
,44,884/- for the period from 2007-08 to 2011-12. The adjudicating authority dropped the proceedings initiated under the SCN. Revenue filed appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals). By the impugned order, the Commissioner (Appeals) disallowed the cenvat credit and also confirmed the demand of service tax along with interest and imposed penalty. Hence, the appellant filed this appeal. 3. Heard both sides and perused the appeal records. 4. It appears from the show-cause notice that on scrutiny of the records, it was found that there were certain irregularities on availment of cenvat credit. The appellant contended that they had paid the interest and the penalty and therefore, as per section 73(4A) of the Finance Act, 1994 there is no requirem
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
h payment and prayed for waiver of show cause notice by letter dated 12.09.2012 to the investigating team. After considering the facts and the relevant law at length, the adjudicating authority dropped the proceedings. 5. On the other hand, the Commissioner (Appeals) by the impugned order observed that the appellants were not entitled to receive the benefit of small scale exemption without refuting the figures as mentioned in the adjudication order. It appears that the Commissioner (Appeals) passed the order without examining the records at length and therefore, such an order cannot sustain in the eye of law. Apparently, the adjudicating authority had given the detailed finding with examination of records and documents which has not been re
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =