TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1997 (1) TMI 253
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e Respondent. [Order]. - The Commissioner of Central Excise acting as adjudicating officer confirmed the demand of duty amounting to Rs. 66,202.33 on the ground that Modvat credit cannot be taken on the strength of certified photocopy of the gate pass. Being aggrieved by this order of the Commissioner the appellants have filed the captioned appeal. 2. The facts of the case in brief are th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ssion/mis-statement and therefore extended period beyond six months was applicable. In reply to the show cause notice the appellants submitted that the period of the demand was between 7-4-1990 to 11-4-1990 and the show cause notice was issued on 28-10-1994 whereas in the mean time the RT 12 returns for the month of April have been finalised. It was contended by the appellants before the lower aut....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed copy). He submits that there was absolutely no suppression or mis-statement nor was there any intention to evade payment of duty. He submits that this point of limitation was raised before the adjudicating authority. However adjudicating authority has no where mentioned as to why this claim of final assessment of the RT 12 returns for the material period was rejected. He submits that show cause....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... finalised. The ld. JDR could not point out any paragraph showing rebuttal of the contentions of the appellants that there was no suppression or mis-statement in as much as RT 12 returns were finalised for the relevant period; that duty paying documents were submitted and accepted by them as such. 5. Heard the submissions of both sides. The short point for determination is whether the demand is h....