Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
Cce, Chandigarh-I vs M/S. Neelkanth Concast Steels (P) Ltd on 5 July, 2016
CUSTOMS, EXCISE & SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,
SCO 147-148, SECTOR 17-C, CHANDIGARH-160017
SINGLE MEMBER BENCH
Court-I
Appeal No.E/50132/2016
[Arising out of the OIA No.CHD-EXCUS-000-APP-058-059-15-16 dt.9.6.15passed by the CCE(Appeals), Chandigarh)
Date of Hearing/Decision: 05.07.2016
For Approval & signature:
Honble Mr.Ashok Jindal, Member (Judicial)
1.
Whether Press Reporter may be allowed to see the Order for publication as per Rule 27 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982?
No
2.
Whether it would be released under Rule 27 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982 for publication in any authoritative report or not?
No
3.
Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the order?
seen
4.
Whether order is to be circulated to the Department Authorities?
Yes
CCE, Chandigarh-I Appellant
Vs.
M/s. Neelkanth Concast Steels (P) Ltd. Respondent
Present for the Appellant: Shri T.K.Trehan, AR Present for the Respondent: None Coram: Honble Mr.Ashok Jindal, Member (Judicial) FINAL ORDER NO. 60878/2016 PER: ASHOK JINDAL The Revenue is in appeal against the impugned order wherein the Commissioner (Appeals) has allowed the credit to the respondents.
2. None appeared on behalf of the respondents nor has any request for adjournment been received. But in the interest of just, the matter is taken up for final disposal.
3. During the course of argument, by the learned AR, it was found that against the impugned order, the respondent has also filed appeal before this Tribunal and this Tribunal vide Order No.203/2016-CHD dated 16.2.2016 already decided the issue that the demands pertaining to extended period of limitation are not sustainable and the demands within the normal period are confirmed alongwith interest and penalty is also confirmed for the said period of demand.
4. As the issue has already been decided, in the circumstance, the appeal of the Revenue is disposed of in the light of the decision of this Tribunal in the appellants own case cited hereinabove.
(Dictated and pronounced in the court) (ASHOK JINDAL) MEMBER (JUDICIAL) mk 1