GST Helpdesk   Subscription   Demo   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2016 (8) TMI 983 - CESTAT ALLAHABAD

2016 (8) TMI 983 - CESTAT ALLAHABAD - TMI - Invokation of extended period of limitation - Demand - Job-work - goods were manufactured out of raw materials supplied by M/s S.B.C.H. and have only received job work charges and on manufacture, corrugated boxes were sent to M/s S.B.C.H. without payment of duty - non-fulfillment of conditions laid down in the Notification No. 214/86 dated 25.03.1986 - Held that:- if the provision for invocation of extended period is to be applied in a particular case .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

290/2007(DB) - Final Order No. 70308/2016 - Dated:- 1-6-2016 - Mr. Anil Choudhary, Member (Judicial) and Mr. Anil G. Shakkarwar, Member (Technical) Shri B.C. Narasimhan, Advocate, Shri Hrishikesh, Advocate for Appellant Shri D.K. Deb, Assistant Commissioner (A.R.), for Respondent ORDER Present appeal is filed by Premier Packaging Pvt. Ltd against Order-in-Appeal No. 67-CE/GZB/2007 dated 09/07/2007. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the appellant are manufacturer of corrugated boxes and wit .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ture, corrugated boxes were sent to M/s S.B.C.H. without payment of duty and as per notification 214/86 dated 25.03.1986 they were exempted from payment of excise duty as job worker. It appeared to the department that the conditions laid down in the notification No. 214/86 were not fulfilled by the appellant, Therefore, by invoking the provisions for extended period, show cause notice No. 04/JC/GZB/2006 dated 02.02.2006 was issued to the appellant demanding Central Excise duty of ₹ 5,76,85 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Order-in-Original and rejected the appeal. Aggrieved by said Order-in-Appeal, the appellant is before us. 4. The ground of appeal is inter-alia that the demand is barred by limitation. The appellant has stated that the requirements of invoking extended period has not been fulfilled by revenue for issue of show cause notice dated 02.02.2006. They have relied on various case laws. 5. Heard the Learned Counsel for appellant who has interalia submitted that para 4 of the said show cause notice deals .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 



|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version