Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2018 (7) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (7) TMI 993 - CESTAT CHENNAITime Limitation - suppression of facts - second mode of billing was not declared in the ER-1 Returns - Held that:- The ld. A.R is correct in his assertion that department was only aware about the invoices on which duty had been paid and not with regard to supplementary invoices / billing done by the respondents, since the second mode of billing was not declared in the ER-1 Returns. This aspect has not been disputed by the respondents either before the lower authorities or even in the cross objections filed by them - the respondents cannot make a claim that the entire manner of billing both by Central Excise invoices and also by supplementary invoices for job work was known to the department. This being so, the finding of the Commissioner (Appals) that the matter was hit by limitation does not appeal to us. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of Revenue.
|