Case Law Details
Mak Engineering Industries Limited Vs Commissioner of Central Excise (CESTAT Kolkata)
Held that longer period of limitation cannot be invoked on the ground that no specific instance of suppression of facts was proved against the assessee.
Facts-
A common show cause notice dated 04.07.2001 had been issued to both Mak Engineering and its job worker, ASRM. The first appellant i.e. Mak Engineering was required to show cause as to why Modvat Credit totaling to Rs.15,73,482/- should not be disallowed, interest should not be charged and penalty should not be imposed. The show cause notice alleged, inter alia, that the ingots/billets and rounds used by the appellant were not of the type specified by the buyer and on such basis, credit of Rs.12,83,740/- availed in respect of inputs used in manufacturing Elastic Rail Clip (ERC), Modified Loose Jaw (MLJ), Rail Anchor and Suspension Shackle was liable to be disallowed. Further, credit of Rs.2,89,742/- was proposed to be disallowed in respect of Fish Plate Bar and Loose Jaw Bar on the ground that duty had been paid by the manufacturer, M/s Bengal Hammer Industries (Unit II) whereas the commercial invoice for the same had been raised by Unit III or Unit IV of the said manufacturer.
The de-novo adjudication proceedings culminated in the common impugned order dated 21.02.2012 confirming the proposed demands against Mak Engineering and ASRM. Being aggrieved by the said adjudication order, Mak Engineering and ASRM preferred separate appeals before this Tribunal.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Author Bio
