9911796707
TMI Blog2006 (3) TMI 437X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t. Shri K.S. Reddy, JDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : S.L. Peeran, Member (J)]. - The appellant is challenging the Order-in-Appeal No. 89/02-C.E., dated 25-10-2002 confirming demands on converted certain quantity of paper reels into reams and the converted reams were sold from Serinarsannapalem by raising commercial invoices. The appellant took the contentions that there was no cause to in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g and packing of paper were not manufacturing activity under Section 2(f) of the CE Act. Therefore, it is submitted by the Counsel that the issue pertaining to the addition of the conversion charges in the assessable value was a disputed matter and the Department was fully aware of this aspect of the matter and hence, the demands are barred by time, as there was no suppression of facts. 2. T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cannot at a latter point of time allege suppression of facts. The confirmation of demands for larger period is not sustainable, as there was no suppression of facts or deliberate withholding of information or mis-declaration or fraud. Hence, the demands are barred by time and the appeal is allowed on this ground alone with consequential relief, if any. (Operative portion of this Order was pronoun ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
