2007 (1) TMI 469

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Rajak, DR, for the Respondent. [Order]. - Heard both sides. 2. The appellants filed this appeal against the impugned order whereby the demand is confirmed in respect of differential duty. 3. The contention of the appellants is that they are engaged in the manufacture of sugar and the Ministry of Food and Civil Supplies issued a scheme granting certain benefits to the new sugar ind .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Revenue's contention is that as per policy of Ministry of Food and Civil Supplies granting certain benefits were restricted by issuing another circular dated 31-1-1989 which is only communicated to the sugar factories and the appellants had not paid the duty as per circular. Therefore, demand is not time-barred. 5. The contention of the appellants is that demand is time-barred as the Revenu .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X