Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2011 (2) TMI 1009

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 3. Brief facts of the case are that Appellants are working under the CENVAT Credit Scheme and were availing credit in respect of the duty paid on the inputs used in or in relation to manufacture of the final product. During verification it was found that Appellant availed credit on the strength of two invoices Nos.185, 188 and during verification it was found that supplier manufacturer has not paid duty in respect of these two invoices. In these circumstances Show Cause Notice was issued to the Appellants for denial of credit and for imposition of penalties. The adjudicating authority confirmed the demand and imposed penalties and Commissioner(Appeals) dismissed the Appeal. 4. Contention of Appellant is that they were regularly purchasin .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... on in the case of Commissioner of C.Ex., Surat-I v. Neminath Fabrics Pvt.Ltd. - 2010 (256) E.L.T. 369 (Guj.) to submit that in case of suppression with intent to evade payment of duty Show Cause Notice can be issued. 6. In the present case I find that in respect of two invoices the credit is denied. The invoices were shown to be issued by M/s.Three F Filters Pvt.Ltd., New Delhi and during investigation the manufacturer supplier denied that the invoices in question were not issued by them. In these circumstances the Appellants are not entitled for credit on the invoices respect of which no duty has been paid. 7. Contention of Appellant regarding time bar I find that the credit was availed in the month of January and February 2002 and du .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... stipulates that in case of such non-levy, etc. of duty which is by reason fraud, collusion, or any mis-statement or suppression of facts, or contravention of any provisions of the Act or the rules made thereunder, the provisions of sub-section (1) of Section 11A of the Act shall have effect as if the words 'one year' have been substituted by the words 'five years'. 13. The Explanation which follows stipulates that where service of notice has been stayed by an order of a Court, the period of such stay shall be excluded from computing the aforesaid period of one year or five years, as the case may be. 14.  Thus the scheme that unfolds is that in case of non levy where there is no fraud, collusion, etc., it is open to the Central Exc .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... to rewriting the statutory provision and no canon of interpretation permits such an exercise by any Court. If it is not open to the superior court to either add or substitute words in a statute such right cannot be available to a statutory Tribunal. 17. The proviso cannot be read to mean that because there is knowledge the suppression which stands established disappears. Similarly the concept of reasonable period of limitation which is sought to be read into the provision by some of the orders of the Tribunal also cannot be permitted in law when the statute itself has provided for a fixed period of limitation. It is equally well settled that it is not open to the Court while reading a provision to either rewrite the period of limitation .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... islation be either curtailed or enhanced. In the present case as well as in the decisions on which reliance has been placed by the learned advocate for the respondent, the Tribunal has introduced a novel concept of date of knowledge and has imported into the proviso a new period of limitation of six months from the date of knowledge. The reasoning appears to be that once knowledge has been acquired by the department there is no suppression and as such the ordinary statutory period of limitation prescribed under sub-section (1) of Section 11A would be applicable. However such reasoning appears to be fallacious inasmuch as once the suppression is admitted, merely because the department acquires knowledge of the irregularities the suppression .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates