CUSTOMS, EXCISE & SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI REGIONAL BENCH - COURT NO. I Excise Miscellaneous Application No. 86972 of 2024 (On behalf of the Respondent)

In Excise Appeal No. 86668 of 2016 [Arising out of Order-in-Original No. PUN-EXCUS-001-PR.COM-111-15-16 dated 31.03.2016 passed by the Principal Commissioner of Central Excise & Service Tax, Pune-I]

Thermax Limited .… Appellant D-1 Block, MIDC Industrial Area, Chinchwad, Pune 411 019.

Versus Principal Commissioner of Central GST & Central …. Respondent Excise, 2^nd Floor, GST Bhavan, 41-A, Sassoon Road, Opp. Wadia College, Pune 411 001.

WITH Excise Appeal No. 86687 of 2016 [Arising out of Order-in-Original No. PUN-EXCUS-001-PR.COM-111-15-16 dated 31.03.2016 passed by the Principal Commissioner of Central Excise & Service Tax, Pune-I]

M.S. Unnikrishnan .… Appellant D-1 Block, MIDC Industrial Area, Chinchwad, Pune 411 019.

Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Pune-I …. Respondent ICE House, 41-A, Sassoon Road, Opp. Wadia College, Pune 411 001.

APPEARANCE:

Shri Rajesh Ostwal, Advocate for the Appellant Shri A.K. Srivastava, Authorised Representative for the Respondent CORAM:

HON’BLE MR. S.K. MOHANTY, MEMBER (JUDICIAL)

HON’BLE MR. M.M. PARTHIBAN, MEMBER (TECHNICAL)

FINAL ORDER NO. 85362-85363/2026 Date of Hearing: 25.02.2026 Date of Decision: 25.02.2026 PER: S.K. MOHANTY Revenue has filed the miscellaneous application, seeking change of name of the respondent in the cause title to the appeal filed before the Tribunal. The application is considered and accordingly the respondent’s name in the cause title is amended to read as “Principal Commissioner of Central GST & Central Excise, Pune-I”, having address at 2^nd Floor, GST Bhavan, 41-A, Sassoon Road, Opp. Wadia College, Pune 411 001.

Accordingly, the miscellaneous application is allowed.

2. Heard both sides and examined the case records.

3. Brief facts of the case are that the appellants had availed and utilized CENVAT credit irregularly during the period December 2013 and reversed the same from their CENVAT account and also paid interest amount attributable to such reversal of CENVAT credit. Further, the appellants had also deposited 25% of the penalty amount and intimated the details of such payment to the department vide their letter dated 21.02.2014. However, the department had initiated show cause proceedings against the appellants, seeking for confirmation of the CENVAT amount along with interest and for imposition of penalty. The Show Cause Notice (SCN) dated 18.12.2015 had also proposed for imposition of penalty on the Managing Director of the appellant company, Shri M.S. Unnikrishnan. The SCN dated 18.12.2015 issued by the department was adjudicated by the learned Principal Commissioner of Central Excise & Service Tax, vide the impugned order dated 31.03.2016, wherein the proposals made in the SCN dated 18.12.2015 were confirmed. Feeling aggrieved with the said impugned order dated 31.03.2016, the appellants have preferred these appeals before the Tribunal.

4. In support of confirmation of the adjudged demands, the learned adjudicating authority at paragraph 24.02 in the impugned order has recorded the following findings:-

“24.02 As regards legal sustainability of the present SCN, the Noticee is of the opinion that in view of the fact that they have discharged the entire duty liability along with interest pavable thereon as well as penalty @ 25% of duty so evaded even before the issuance of SCN, under the provisions of Section 11A(6) / (7) of the erstwhile CEA, 1944 no notice should have been served on them and all proceedings in respect of said duty should have been deemed to have been concluded. The Noticee's this view is incorrect and not acceptable in as much as the Noticees admitted to have availed and utilized fraudulent Cenvat credit of input services for almost 8 long years i.e. from 2006 -07 to 2013-14. The provisions of Section 11A of CEA, was amended with effect only from 08-

04-2011. Even though the present SCN