TMI Blog2005 (1) TMI 700X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... appeal arises from OIA No. 82/2003 dated 28.11.2003 by which the Commissioner (Appeals) has confirmed the OIO confirming the duty demand of ₹ 2,12,721/- and like sum as penalty besides a penalty of ₹ 5000/- in terms of Rule 173Q. The appellants are manufacturers of Sugar confectionery on job work basis for M/s. Nutrine Confectionary Company Ltd. and are clearing the same after paying C ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rials, it would be difficult to ascertain the actual cost of the materials consumed for a given period in advance in view of the frequent fluctuations in the prices of raw materials like sugar and glucose. Therefore, for the purpose of provisional assessments based on the cost sheets, they had adopted higher prices for basic input so as to set any increases in the prices of the said inputs due to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... duty for the relevant period as stated in the Show cause Notice is not correct and requires modification. They also pointed out that there was no suppression of facts as the assessments had been completed from time to time. The show Cause Notice has been issued on 12.3.1999 for the period 4.10.1995 to 30.11.1997 and hence it is beyond the period of limitation. Both the authorities did not agree wi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ctuations in the prices of raw materials, the actual cost can be arrived at finally when the accounts are closed at the year end. We also notice that the Show Cause Notices issued from time to time covering the initial period October 1995 to November, 1997 requiring them to pay duty by including the element of modvat credit in the cost of the raw materials resulted in OIA dated 20.01.2000 wherein ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e value is lower and ignoring other items. We also find that the assessments were not provisional and had been finalized and that there was no provisional order of assessment. In view of the large number of judgments on time bar cited like Tamil Nadu Housing Board vs CCE Madras-1994 (74) ELT 9 and that of ITW Signode India Ltd. vs CCE, 2003 (158) ELT 403 (SC), there is no ground for invoking large ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
