9911796707
TMI Blog2010 (5) TMI 871X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , Advocate For the Respondent : Shri Avinash Thete, SDR JUDGEMENT Per : Mrs. Archana Wadhwa, After dispensing with the condition of pre-deposit of duty of ₹ 20,76,981/- and penalty of identical amount, we proceed to decide the appeal itself, inasmuch as we find that the issue is covered with the precedent decision of the Tribunal. 2. Appellants are engaged in the manufacture of pharma ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t the matter was referred to the Larger Bench and the issue was not free from doubts. As such, he submits that the entire demand is beyond the period of limitation, the appeal be allowed on the ground of time-bar. 3. After hearing the learned DR, who support the impugned order on the ground of invocation of longer period, we find that the Tribunal in the above referred judgment of M/s. Marsha Pha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 39;ble Supreme Court has held that circulars beneficial for the assessee are bound to be implemented by the officers of the department, there is no such law laid down by the Hon'ble Court that the circular issued by the Board is binding on the assessees as well as on the Tribunal. Therefore, it cannot be said since Board issued a circular the assessee is not entitled to entertain an opinion wh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ere the matter is referred to the Larger Bench and has also discussed the effect of the Circular issued by the Board (which has been made the basis for invoking longer period in the present case). By following the same, we held that demand in the present case is also barred by limitation. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and appeal is allowed. Stay petition as also appeal get disposed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
