Bekeart Mukand Wire Indus Pvt Ltd Versus Commissioner of CGST Kolhapur
Central Excise
2018 (6) TMI 311 – CESTAT MUMBAI – TMI
CESTAT MUMBAI – AT
Dated:- 20-3-2018
E\/85087\/2018 – A\/86113\/2018
Central Excise
Shri M V Ravindran, Member (Judicial)
\nMs Manasi Patil, Advocate for appellant
\nShri A.B. Kulgod, Assistant Commissioner (AR) for respondent
\nORDER
\nThis appeal is directed against Order-in-Appeal No: PUN-EXCUS-001-APP-0538\/2017-18 dated 31\/10\/2017 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals – II), Pune.
\n2. Heard both the sides and perused the records.
\n3. Learned Counsel submits that in this appeal they are only contesting the penalty of imposed by the first appellate authority<\/p>\n
= = = = = = = =<\/p>\n
Plain text (Extract) only<\/strong> = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n ule 15(1) of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 which was not in challenge before him by Revenue. = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n Plain text (Extract) only<\/strong> = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Bekeart Mukand Wire Indus Pvt Ltd Versus Commissioner of CGST KolhapurCentral Excise2018 (6) TMI 311 – CESTAT MUMBAI – TMICESTAT MUMBAI – ATDated:- 20-3-2018E\/85087\/2018 – A\/86113\/2018Central ExciseShri M V Ravindran, Member (Judicial) Ms Manasi Patil, Advocate for appellant Shri A.B. Kulgod, Assistant Commissioner (AR) for respondent ORDER This appeal is directed against Order-in-Appeal No: PUN-EXCUS-001-APP-0538\/2017-18 … Continue reading “Bekeart Mukand Wire Indus Pvt Ltd Versus Commissioner of CGST Kolhapur”<\/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-12068","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/12068","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=12068"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/12068\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=12068"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=12068"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=12068"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
For full text:-Visit the Source <\/a><\/p>\n
\n4. When the matter cam up for disposal on 15\/03\/2018 I have directed the Learned Authorised Representative to ascertain whether Revenue is also in appeal against the impugned order. Learned Authorised Representative submits that as per his information and knowledge no revenue's appeal is pending against the impugned order.
\n5. On consideration of the submissions made, I do find merits in the arguments put forth by the Learned Counsel. The adjudicating authority by the order-in-original has only imposed penalties under Section 11AC read with Rule 15(2) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. It seems that against the said ord<\/p>\n
For full text:-Visit the Source <\/a><\/p>\n