TMI Blog2003 (10) TMI 552X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... [Order]. Genesis, the appellant, took credit between December, 1998 and December, 1999 of the duty shown to have been paid on a consignment of cold rolled cold annealed steel coils that it received from the three dealers. Investigation by the department disclosed that the goods cleared on payment of duty by the manufacturers to the three dealers cleared after payment of duty, consisted of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... autions to ensure that the inputs or goods on which appropriate verify duty had been paid as required by Rule 173Q(bb)(1). The rules relating to Modvat during the period in question, it did not require a manufacture to take any reasonable step to ensure that duty had been paid on the goods, which it proposes to take credit. Rule 173Q(bb)(1) makes liable to penalty the manufacturer who does not tak ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... paid, as in this case, credit could not be taken for the simple reason that credit is only taken on the duty paid and cannot be taken where it is not paid. Had the notice been issued within the normal period of limitation of one year denial would have been in order. However, the notice was issued two to three years after taking of credit and therefore extended period of limitation cannot be invok ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hat it received was of the dimensions different from that mentioned in the invoices of the manufacturer to the dealer, and there was therefore no evidence to payment of duty, the extended period of limitation could not have been invoked. The notice does not impute any such knowledge to the appellant. Although the notice does not contain existence of facts of sub-rule (2) of Rule 57-I, justify invo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
