TMI Blog1989 (4) TMI 172X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... [Order per : R. Jayaraman, Member (T) ]. - For hearing the applicants appeal on merits, they are required to deposit a sum of Rs. 68,176.23, towards duty and Rs. 500/- towards penalty. 2. Shri Willington Christian, the learned Advocate, on behalf of the applicants, contended that the order of the authorities below is prima facie bad in law. The issue relates to the recovery of MODVAT credi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to be issued only on 16-11-1987, much beyond a period of six months. In the show cause notice, there was no allegation of suppression but reference to Rule 173Q was made for imposition of penalty. If the notice is taken as alleging suppression of facts, then it ought not to have been issued by the Supdt., since as per the amendment to Section 11A proviso, only the Collector can issue such a notic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ry. 4. After hearing both sides, we agree with Shri Willington Christian that the notice is prima facie time-barred. If it is to be held that extended period has been invoked, there should have been specific allegation of misdeclaration etc. which are not found in the show cause notice. In case such an allegation is said to have been made, then the show cause notice should have been issued by th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
