Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2018 (11) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (11) TMI 355 - AT - Central ExciseApplicability of period of limitation where B-17 bond has been furnished by 100% EOU - goods manufactured and cleared in DTA by use of raw-material procured from EOU as well as from indigenous Vendor against invalidation of Advance Authorization - imports or not - exemption under Serial No. 3 of Notification No. 23/2003-CE dated 31.03.2003 denied - suppression of facts or not Held that:- The procurement of raw material from 100% EOU/Advance License Holder, the manufacture of goods out of such raw material and removal of finished goods in DTA under Exemption Notification 23/03-CE under exemption serial No. 3 were disclosed to the department, therefore, there is absolutely no suppression of fact on the part of the appellant. Moreover, the issue involved is of grave interpretation of Notification. The Supreme Court in the case of Favourite Industry [2012 (4) TMI 65 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] extended the benefit of same notification interpreting same issue involved in the present case, therefore, the appellant had bonafide belief that since the raw material procured is produced or manufactured within India, they are entitled for exemption on the DTA clearances; therefore, we agree with this proposition that the appellant had no malafide intention to evade the duty of excise. The contention of Ld. Commissioner that since B17 Bond was executed by the appellant limitation shall not apply is not sustainable - on the issue of limitation particularly in respect of 100% EOU, the demand is not sustainable on limitation as the SCN was issued beyond the period of 1 year - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
|