Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2006 (9) TMI 253

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... voked as it is beyond the time period. The Tribunal did not permit the argument to be raised as the same had not been raised before the other authorities. thus, these appeals are allowed and the demand raised against the appellant for the year 1978-1979 is hereby dropped. - 4014-4015 of 2001 - - - Dated:- 6-9-2006 - Ashok Bhan and Markandey Katju, JJ. REPRESENTED BY: S/Shri C. Harishankar, P. Mohapatra for Tara Chandra Sharma, Advocates, for the Appellant. S/Shri K. Radhakrishnan, Sr. Advocate, Ms. Kiran Bhardwaj for B. Krishna Prasad, Advocates, for the Respondent. [Order]. - These appeals are directed against the Final Order Nos. 276- 277/2001-B dated 25-5-2001 passed by the Customs, Excise Gold (Control) Appellate Trib .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... . 71/78. The appellate authority set aside the order impugned before it and remanded the matter to the Assistant Collector for de now adjudication in accordance with law after affording due opportunity to the appellant. 7. The Assistant Collector thereafter issued a show cause notice dated 4th March, 1980 to the appellant under Rule 10(l) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 (for short 'the Rules') which reads as under: "10 Recovery of duties not levied or not paid, or short levied or not paid in full or erroneously refunded :- (1) Where any duty has not been levied or paid or has been short levied or erroneously refunded or any duty assessed has not been paid in full, the proper officer may, within six months from the relevant date, s .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ime it has been held that the classification list filed by the appellant w e f 1-4-1978 was approved by the Assistant Collector on 17-12-1979 in which the benefit of exemption under Notification No. 71/78 claimed by the assessee was denied, against which the appellant filed an appeal which was allowed and the matter was remanded back to the Assistant Collector by the Collector (Appeals) for de novo consideration At this stage notice was issued on 4-3-1980 which was within six months of the approval of the classification list, i e on 17-12-1979 Relying upon a decision of the Larger Bench in Rajiv Mardia v. CCE Indore - 2001 (129) E LT. 334 (Tri -LB), it was held that the assessments from 1-4-1978 till 17-12-1979 the date on which the classif .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ained in Metal Forgings v. Union of India - 2002 (146) E.L.T. 241(S.C.) and it was held that the decision in Samrat International (P) Ltd. (supra) was given on its own peculiar facts and could not be understood to mean that till the classification list is approved, assessment framed would be treated to be provisional without following the procedure laid down under Rule 9B of the Rules. It was held: "From the above, it is clear that to establish that the clearances were made on a provisional basis, there should be first of all an order under Rule 9B of the Rules, and then material to show that the goods were cleared on the basis of said provisional basis, and payment of duty was also made on the basis of said provisional classification. Th .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... s as provided under clause (1) of Rule 10 of the Rules. Extended period of limitation had not been invoked in the present case. 17. On behalf of the appellant, another point raised before the Tribunal was relating to reworking out of the assessable value under Section 4(4)(d)(ii) of the Act. The Tribunal did not permit the argument to be raised as the same had not been raised before either of the authorities below. We are not going into this question in view of our finding that the show cause notice issued to the appellant was beyond the period of six months and therefore barred by time. 18. For the reasons stated above, these appeals are allowed and the demand raised against the appellant for the year 1978-1979 is hereby dropped. Parti .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates