Exide Industries Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Central GST & Excise Pune I
Central Excise
2018 (5) TMI 1052 – CESTAT MUMBAI – TMI
CESTAT MUMBAI – AT
Dated:- 20-3-2018
APPEAL NO: E\/85035\/2018 – A\/86139\/2018
Central Excise
Shri M V Ravindran, Member (Judicial)
\nShri Vinay S. Sejpal, Advocate for appellant
\nShri S Hasija, Superintendent (AR) for the respondent
\nThis appeal is directed against Order-in-Appeal No: PUN-EXCUS-001-APP-672\/2017-18 dated 13\/11\/2017 passed by the Commissioner of Central Tax (Appeals), Pune-I.
\n2. Heard both the sides and perused the records.
\n3. The issue that falls for consideration is whether demand of MODVAT credit along with interest was rightly confirmed or otherwise and whether imposition of<\/p>\n
= = = = = = = =<\/p>\n
Plain text (Extract) only<\/strong> = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n erein. In view of this, I hold that the demands confirmed by the lower authorities are correct and is to be upheld. = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n Plain text (Extract) only<\/strong> = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Exide Industries Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Central GST & Excise Pune ICentral Excise2018 (5) TMI 1052 – CESTAT MUMBAI – TMICESTAT MUMBAI – ATDated:- 20-3-2018APPEAL NO: E\/85035\/2018 – A\/86139\/2018Central ExciseShri M V Ravindran, Member (Judicial) Shri Vinay S. Sejpal, Advocate for appellant Shri S Hasija, Superintendent (AR) for the respondent This appeal is directed against … Continue reading “Exide Industries Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Central GST & Excise Pune I”<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-11829","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/11829","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=11829"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/11829\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=11829"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=11829"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=11829"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
For full text:-Visit the Source <\/a><\/p>\n
\n5. As regards the interest and penalty, I find that the period involved in this case is being prior to 1995 and the issue being disputed, which could have been argued on limitation, the question of imposing equivalent amount of penalty does not arise. It is also to be noted that the issue is almost 21 years old, in my considered view, the same needs to be put to rest. Accordingly, interest liability and penalty imposed by the lower authorities are set aside as in the remand proceedings we had allowed CENVAT credit of various moulds which were received and subsequently removed to the job-workers. On this presumption it has to <\/p>\n
For full text:-Visit the Source <\/a><\/p>\n