9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (10) TMI 802X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... upon it by treating the rexin cloth as a product falling under Clause 19(iii) of Schedule-I to the Central Excise Tariff Act (for short the Tariff Act). The respondent made a representation to the Assessing Authority on 09.03.1981 with a prayer to treat the rexin cloth as the one under Clause 19(i) of the Schedule-I to the Tariff Act. Alleging that its representation was not being considered, the respondent filed W.P.No.2199 of 1981 before this Court with a prayer to declare the inaction on the part of the Assessing Authority as arbitrary and for consequential directions. An interim order was passed in the writ petition with a direction to the respondent therein to treat the rexin cloth under Clause 19(i) of the Tariff Act, subject to the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 13.01.1994, Appeal No.388/96(H)(CE) was allowed on 24.09.1996, mainly on the ground that the demand was barred by limitation stipulated under Section 11-A of the Act, as it stood at the relevant point of time. The Department filed Appeal Nos.E/SB/5264/95 and E/1425/96 before the Central Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal, South Zonal Bench, Madras (for short the Tribunal), against the orders passed by the Commissioner. The two Members of the Tribunal, who heard the appeals expressed divergent opinions on the question of limitation. Therefore, the matter was referred to a Third member, who took the view that the demand of arrears of excise duty from the respondent is barred by Section 11-A of the Act. Applications filed by the p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... posted repeatedly, to enable the appearance of the learned counsel for the respondent, none had appeared. This is not the stage, at which we need to answer the questions referred to above one way or the other. The exercise is only to verify whether those questions deserve to be referred to this Court by the Tribunal. Section11-A of the Act, as it stood then, prescribes the period of limitation, within which the Department can recover the arrears of excise duty. One year was stipulated for this purpose. Where however, the default is committed or failure of recovery was on account of acts of fraud or misrepresentation or misstatement, the prescribed limitation is five years from the date on which the amount became due. Obviously because t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... case, the Department was disabled from recovering the difference of duty between the items that fall under Clause 19(iii) on the one hand and Clause 19(i) on the other hand only on account of the interim orders passed by this Court in W.P.No.2199 of 1981. Once that writ petition ended in the form of a direction to the respondent therein to pass an order and an order was passed on 04.05.1987, affirming the original classification, the question as to whether the period deserves to be excluded in the process of reckoning limitation under Section 11-A of the Act needs to be considered. We therefore, allow the C.E.R.Cs. and the Tribunal, which now has jurisdiction over the respondent, shall refer the questions to this Court for answer, duly pu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
