Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + HC Central Excise - 2018 (4) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (4) TMI 1317 - HC - Central ExciseValidity of SCN - time limitation - suppression of facts - Whether a demand cum SCN can not be issued within a period of five years from the relevant date as per the provisions contained under the proviso to section 11A(1) of the erstwhile Central Excise Act, 1944, when the party has suppressed the material fact of production and clearance of excisable goods from the department with an intent to evade payment of Central Excise duty? - Held that: - the revenue has not taken action against the assessee within the period of one year from the relevant date. What is that relevant date in the given facts and circumstances, is not in dispute, for it is the date on which the goods were cleared, i.e. date of clearance of goods/filing of monthly returns. Both events incidentally fall within the same month, which in the instant case, was February, 2008. It is also a matter of record that in July, 2009 itself, the assessee had apprised the department of revenue, by way of a declaration, as envisaged under the Act/Rules/ Regulations, indicating its intent of taking benefit of Notification dated 10.06.2003 - assessee had made evident its intent of availing the benefits under the Act, in accordance with law. Under identical circumstances, the Apex Court in case titled as Pushpam Pharmaceuticals Company Versus Collector of Central Excise, Bombay, [1995 (3) TMI 100 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] has explained that in normal understanding, contravention of any of the provisions of the Act cannot be read separately, in isolation or differently, that of the accompanying words, such as fraud, collusion or willful default - Where facts are known to both the parties omission by one to do what he might have done and not that he must have done, does not render it suppression. Appeal disposed off.
|