TMI Blog2003 (7) TMI 615X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... [Order per : Justice K.K. Usha, President]. In this appeal at the instance of the assessee the challenge is against the order passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise, Coimbatore, dated 24-4-2002. The appellant is engaged in the manufacture of Pre-stressed cement concrete pipes falling under Heading 68.07 of the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. They have entered into a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he freight element in the assessable value. The assessee took the stand that the consolidated composite agreement entered into with TWAD Board contained separate rate for each item of work, viz., manufacturing, testing, supply and delivery of pre-stressed concrete pipes, supply and delivery of rubber rings, for jointing, fabrication, manufacture, supply and delivery of pumping mains, mild steel fi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f limitation on the ground that the appellant had mis-declared the place of removal in the declaration filed under Rule 173C(3A). 3. Before us the learned Counsel for the appellant made detailed submissions on merits relying on the decisions of this Tribunal as well as Supreme Court. He also submitted that the Commissioner has committed an error in rejecting the contention on the question of lim ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of limitation under Section 11A(1). After hearing both sides and after going through the records of the case we are inclined to take the view that there was no suppression of fact by the appellant with intent to evade duty. The appellant had filed with the departmental authority each of the works contract entered into with the Board along with the split up of the total price giving therein the ex ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in detail the entire facts and records and then come to a decision. We are therefore of the view that the Department has not proved that there was suppression of fact on the part of the assessee with intention to evade duty. Therefore, the demand for the period 1-10-96 to 30-9-2000 is barred by limitation. We make it clear that the proceedings pending before the Assistant Commissioner, Central Exc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
