9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (6) TMI 480X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r: Ashok Jindal 1. The appellants are in appeal against the impugned order. Demands were confirmed denying the benefit of Notification No.89/95, which was availed by the appellants. 2. The short issue involved in this case is that the appellants are manufacturing both the dutiable as well as non-dutiable exempted products. During the relevant period i.e. May 2000 to November 2001 the appellant ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fore us. 3. Shri S.P.Mathew, Ld. Advocate for the appellants appeared before us and fairly admitted that on merits the appellants have no case, but he drew our attention to the show-cause notice as well as RT-12 returns and declaration filed by the appellants during the relevant time and said that in that event the extended period of limitation is not invocable, in the facts of the case. Therefo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ds, both the dutiable as well as final exempted products. In the show-cause notice we have also seen that it has been alleged against the appellants that they have filed declaration misleading and availed benefit of notification wrongly.Therefore, we are of the opinion that when an allegation against the appellants is that they have wrongly availed the benefit of notification, the same cannot be s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
