Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + HC Central Excise - 2023 (7) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (7) TMI 948 - HC - Central ExciseTime Limitation - demand for the period February 1991 to July 1995 (out of total period of February 1991 to January 1996) is barred by limitation or not - HELD THAT:- There is no disputes between the parties that the Show Cause Notice was issued on 12th February 1996, demanding duty along with interest and penalty for the period from February, 1991 to July, 1995. The judgment of the Supreme Court referred by the learned counsel for the Appellant in M/S SANJAY INDL CORPN AND ANOTHER VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, MUMBAI [2015 (3) TMI 592 - SUPREME COURT] the facts pertained to raising a duty of business of cutting larger steal plates. So also, the trader had challenged the imposition of penalty, and amongst other grounds the issue of limitation was taken up. It was held that demand beyond normal period of 6 months was not sustainable. In the present proceedings, the Show Cause Notice was issued on 12th February, 1996, for a period from February, 1991 to July, 1995, which is admittedly issued beyond a period of 6 months. At the relevant time the unamended Section 11A(1) mentioned a period of 6 months within which a notice could be served. Therefore, the Show Cause Notice can be sustained only if the department is able to show that there is suppression on the part of the Appellant. However, no material is available on record that the appellant indulged in suppression so as to attract any of the requirements as contended in the proviso to Section 11A of the Central Excise Act to apply the extended period of limitation. The question of law needs to be answered in favour of the Appellant, and against the respondent - Appeal allowed.
|