Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2005 (12) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2005 (12) TMI 152 - AT - Central ExciseDemand - Limitation - illicit removal of processed fabrics - HELD THAT:- We find that when the Officers had visited the factory premises on 28-9-96 for follow-up action and have drawn factual panchnama on 20/21-9-96, detained certain goods on 21-9-96 and recorded the statement during the period 16/17-9-96 to 12-12-96, the Show Cause Notice dt. 14-3-97 culminated in the order of the Tribunal in PARAG INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD. VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF C. EX.[2000 (7) TMI 133 - CEGAT, MUMBAI] and the prosecution of the case was settled on 23-3-99 as at page 164 of Show Cause Notice on 27-3-2001 for the period in dispute (i.e., 24-6-1996 to 13-9-96) must be on the expiry of six months; i.e., the Show Cause Notice should have been issued latest by 15-3-1997. Hence, the demand is hopelessly time barred. Therefore, even without going into further merits of the case, we can hold that the demand is barred by limitation. However, it would be pertinent to mention that so far as undervaluation is concerned, it has already been mentioned that the duty was paid as per the Trade Notice issued by the Surat Commissioner, which was based on the CBEC order dated 31-12-1993. The learned counsel has already submitted that imposition of penalty is totally illegal as no specific clause of Rule 173Q(1) of CER of 1944 has been mentioned. We fully agree with the contention of the learned counsel that in the absence of the specific contravention, imposition of penalty is totally vague and not sustainable. We, therefore, set aside the impugned order and allow the appeals filed by the appellants.
|