9911796707
TMI Blog2009 (8) TMI 1033X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g disposed off by a common order as the issue involved is identical. Appellants is a merchant exporter who procure the goods from one M/s. Parshwanath Impex. The said goods were exported under claim of rebate. The said rebate claims filed by the appellants were sanctioned by the authorities in the year 2004. However, subsequently proceedings were initiated against them by issuance of show cause no ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ation filed by M/s. Parshwanath Impex for registration with the Central Excise authorities, giving details of residential address as well as his office address, based upon which the registration was given to them. As such, submits the Ld. Advocate that there is no justification for confirming the rebate claims already sanctioned. He also assails the impugned order on the point of limitation and al ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Original Adjudicating Authority, he submits that Revenue can raise demand within a period of five years from the relevant date, in terms of proviso to Section 11A of the Act. He submits that appeal could not have been filed against the rebate sanctioned in 2004, as the fact of non existence of manufacturing unit came in light only subsequently, upon investigation. 4. After carefully conside ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... xistence in the year 2003-04, when they conducted their business with them. The Hon ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Sheela Dyeing Printing Mills Pvt. Limited v. CCE, Surat [2008 (232). E.L.T. 408 (Gujarat)] has held that it is for the assessee to take reasonable steps to ensure the identity and address of the suppliers. It is also not understood that as to how the rebate claim was sanction ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
