APURVA ALUMINIUM CORPORATION Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BEING aggrieved by the order of the Tribunal dated 20 -4 -2010 [2010 (261) E.L.T. 515 (Tri. -Ahmd.)], this Tax Appeal is preferred by the appellant proposing following questions for our consideration:

(2.) HEARD learned counsel Shri Gajendra Jain for the appellant and with his assistance examined the materials on record. It is strenuously submitted by the learned counsel that there is an error on face of the record in the order impugned where the Tribunal has attempted to examine the issue beyond the show cause notice. It has also given findings which is perverse. Therefore this calls for interference from this Court.

(3.) COMMISSIONER confirmed the demand and also upheld the penalty on the partners as well as the firm. This was when challenged before the Tribunal, it upheld the Commissioner's order for irregular Cenvat credit of Rs. 67,51,495/ - and the duty demand. It reduced penalty on the partners however, on the penalty on the firm, it gave an option in view of the decision of this Court in case of Swathi Chemicals Industries and Others. Impugned order is challenged by way of present petition.