TMI Blog2016 (9) TMI 84X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... denatured and Central Excise duty is discharged on it. Invokation of extended period of limitation - Held that:- from the records available it is found that the appellant had kept Revenue authorities informed about the manufacturing activity of molasses and consumption thereof for the manufacturing of rectified sprit and availment of benefit of Notification No. 67/95 as amended. Therefore, the show-cause notice dated 03.01.2001 invoking extended period for demanding duty on molasses for the period in question is blatantly hit by limitation as there was no suppression or misstatement or collusion alleged in the show-cause notice as also no allegation of intention to evade duty on such molasses. - Decided in fvaour of appellant - E/616/0 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... period December 1999 to March 2000 without payment of duty of ₹ 36,90,035/- leviable thereon. It was also alleged that the appellant was directed to follow proper procedure and pay duty on molasses vide letter F.No.Prev/VII/MD/97/2448 dt 03.07.97, but the appellant deliberately defied it. Show-cause notice dated 03.01.2001 was issued accordingly and adjudicated in the aforesaid manner. The adjudicating authority confirmed the demands raised along with interest and also imposed penalties. The appeal filed by the appellant before the first appellate authority was also rejected but the penalty was reduced. 4. Learned Consultant appearing on behalf of the appellant submits that the lower authorities have erred in not appreciati ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as the department was not informed about the non-payment of duty on the molasses. 6. On consideration of the submissions made by both sides, we find that on merits the appellant has no case as the molasses which are manufactured in the sugar factory are undisputedly consumed for the manufacturing of rectified sprit/alcohol which is non-excisable product. The benefit of Notification No. 67/95 as amended will not be applicable in the case in hand as it requires the final product should be dutiable which in this case is not so; though the part of the rectified sprit is denatured and Central Excise duty is discharged on it. 6.1 On the question of limitation, we find that the appellant has a strong case. We have perused the classifica ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
