TMI Blog2014 (4) TMI 799X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hould have called for an explanation from the appellant as to what were the deductions that was claimed in the said invoices. The range authorities as well as the divisional authorities, kept quiet and did not ask any explanation from the appellant and issued a show cause notice on 23.04.2000 demanding the differential duty. In our view, the appellant has made out the case in his favour on the ground of limitation as the revenue authorities cannot allege suppression of facts, misstatement with intend to evade payment of duty as the RT-12 returns as well as the invoices indicated the discharge of duty liability after the deduction as claimed by the appellant - Decided in favour of assessee. - E/235 & 236/07 - - - Dated:- 3-1-2013 - Mr. M. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... such an order, appellant preferred an appeal before the first appellate authority. The first appellate authority concurred the views of the adjudicating authority and upheld the demands confirmed by the lower authorities. 3. Ld. consultant appearing on behalf of the appellant would submit that the lower authorities have not considered their arguments on limitation in a correct perspective. It is his submission that during the relevant period, the RT-12 returns were filed along with the copies of the invoices to the authorities. It is his submission that during the relevant period, the said RT-12 returns were to be scrutinised and assessed and finally approved. It is his submission that having filed the RT-12 returns to the proper officer, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed along with the RT-12 returns with the authorities, the range authorities should have called for an explanation from the appellant as to what were the deductions that was claimed in the said invoices. The range authorities as well as the divisional authorities, kept quiet and did not ask any explanation from the appellant and issued a show cause notice on 23.04.2000 demanding the differential duty. In our view, the appellant has made out the case in his favour on the ground of limitation as the revenue authorities cannot allege suppression of facts, misstatement with intend to evade payment of duty as the RT-12 returns as well as the invoices indicated the discharge of duty liability after the deduction as claimed by the appellant. In the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
