9911796707
TMI Blog2007 (2) TMI 526X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... namurthy, Advocates, for the Respondent. [Order per : S.L. Peeran, Member (J), (Oral)]. - The revenue is aggrieved with Order-in-Appeal No. 236/2004-C.E., dated 10-9-2004 to set aside the Order-in-Original No. 45/2002 dated 17-2-2003 confirming demands and imposing penalty. Revenue issued show cause notice dated 14-5-2002 raising short levy on the ground that the assessee had adopted lower pric ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ands were barred by time. This is under challenge. 2. The learned JDR submits that facts were not known to the department and hence, larger period was invocable. 3. The learned Counsel took us through the records and also to the previous Order-in-Original dated 21-12-1998 passed by the Asst. Commissioner rejecting the refund holding that the assessments had been finalized and they had ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e orders and records produced by the assessee and department, it is clear that the clearances made by the party were finalized and the fact of clearances at that price had been indicated in all the invoices. The assessee's refund claim was rejected by Order-in-Original dated 21-12-1998 on the ground that assessments had been finalized. There is also a letter from Asst. Commissioner dated 18-1-1999 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
