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

2012 (11) TMI 436

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... king them with further liabilities after limitation period is over, is not justified and cannot be maintained and sustained. Therefore, the proceedings started by issuance of show cause notice dated 10-9-2004 and tried to be fortified or enhanced by corrigendum are held to be inappropriate and illegal. Show cause notice dated 10-9-2004 as well as corrigendum dated 17-6-2005 and 28-7-2005 were without any authority of law and inappropriate and illegal - demands and other proposed cause of actions are barred by limitation - appeal is allowed - E/333/2006 - A/2198/2011-WZB/AHD - Dated:- 24-11-2011 - Shri M.V. Ravindran, Dr. P. Babu, JJ. REPRESENTED BY : Shri Deven Parekh, Advocate, for the Appellant. Shri S.K. Mall, AR, for the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ation, confirmed the amounts deposited by the assessee during the pendency, of the case. Hence this appeal. 3. The learned Sr. Advocate Shri Deven Parekh appearing on behalf of the appellant would submit that there is no argument against the merit in this case. He submits that they are only challenging the portion of the adjudicating authority s order which has upheld the limitation but confirmed the demands of amount paid by them on the force of the lower authorities. He draws our attention to paragraphs 18, 19 and 21 of the Order-in-Original. It is his submission that even if the any payment is made by the party on a letter written by the Range Superintendent, the assessee can definitely raise the legal point before the authorities when .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... d 16th September-1999 onwards in the month of February and March-2001 itself At least, then the short levy for full normal period of one year could have been saved, because the period of one year for raising demand was available for short levy as six month period was got substituted under Section 11A w.e.f 12th May-2000. I do fully appreciate the submissions of the noticee company that they have not mis-declared anything and they have not suppressed anything. I do accept such stand of the noticee. Rather the fact is that their invoices were verified, signed stamped on by the. Inspector, Central Excise in-charge of the factory. They also submitted RT-13 statements which was also signed, verified and stamped by the Inspector. Therefore, the q .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ent by the party on its own volition i.e. without challenge and protest, which was leviable and payable according to them. In fact, the quantification of the demand was carried out by the Superintendent and conveyed to the party where the price of the goods cleared was taken as cum duty price. But the period involved was from 1-3-2000 to 31-3-2002. However such payment was really short as the demand was worked out for 14,48,878/- for period 16-9-1999 to 31-8-2002. I further find that, on merits, the demand was initially as conveyed for the period as demanded in show cause noticed dated 10-9-2004 as same was due in terms of the circular dated 6-2-2001. 21. As contemplated under the provisions of Section 11A of Central Excise Act, 1944 ever .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... rger bench further noted that the scope of method as provided under Notification No. 2/95 cannot be changed or varied by issuing a circular without amending the very notification itself. Therefore, the Tribunal held that the effect of the circular dated 6-2-2001 could be made operative only after 1-3-2002. Since notices were not issued in terms of the C.B.E. C. circular even after 1-3-2002 within the normal period therefore the department had to be allowed to suffer for its revenue loss. Since the payment made by the party was on written communication by way of demand which on merit was sustainable and payable and hence the demand so paid is hereby; held as legal, proper, sustainable and maintainable. They do not deserve any refund neithe .....

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