TMI Blog2016 (3) TMI 521X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... before the various judicial forums. Neither the original order nor the impugned order specifically elaborates the grounds on which the element of suppression, fraud, collusion or willfully mis-statement can be alleged and sustained against the appellant. The only ground mentioned is that under Self-assessment Scheme, the appellant/assessee should have been taken credit only on eligible items. Failure to do so will result in invocation of extended period. Find that such reasoning is not sustainable either in law or on fact. Considering the issue involved has been the subject matter of interpretation before the various authorities including courts, the invocation of extended period in the present set of facts cannot be sustained. Accordingly, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ant submitted that the whole proceedings before the Lower Authorities were vitiated by non-service of the show cause notice. He submitted that the notice dated 6.12.2010 was not received by them and when the case was fixed for personal hearing, they approached the Department and were given a copy of show cause notice on 12.1.2012 only. As such, ld. Counsel pleaded that the whole proceedings against them is time barred as there is no case of suppression, fraud, collusion or willful mis-statement with intent to evade duty on their part. Ld. Counsel also submitted that even if the Department's plea that the such show cause notice has been dispatched on 7.12.2010 through speed post, such service is not in compliance to the provisions of Sec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er components, which were classifiable under Chapter 72/73 of the Central Excise Tariff Schedule, which has been a matter of dispute before the various judicial forums. Neither the original order nor the impugned order specifically elaborates the grounds on which the element of suppression, fraud, collusion or willfully mis-statement can be alleged and sustained against the appellant. The only ground mentioned is that under Self-assessment Scheme, the appellant/assessee should have been taken credit only on eligible items. Failure to do so will result in invocation of extended period. I find that such reasoning is not sustainable either in law or on fact. Considering the issue involved has been the subject matter of interpretation before th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
