TMI Blog2006 (4) TMI 527X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 003 passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi (for short the Tribunal ) in Final Order No. 342/2003-NB(A) in Appeal No. E/395/2003-NB(A) [2003 (156) E.L.T. 781 (Tribunal)]. 2. In this case parties addressed only on the point of limitation. It was contended before the adjudicating authority as well as the Tribunal that the department could not invoke the extended period of limitation as all facts were already to the knowledge of the department. On this the Tribunal in Para 6 has recorded the following finding: 6. It is clear that details of the appellant's fabrication work for Railway Coach Factory including supply of raw material by the Coach Factory were known to the Revenue authorities for quite some ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion 11A of the Act it has to be established that the duty of excise has not been paid or levied or short-paid or short-levied or erroneously refunded by reasons of either fraud or collusion or wilful misstatement or suppression of facts or contravention of any provisions of the Act or Rules made thereunder, with intent to evade payment of duty. It was observed : ..........Something positive other than mere inaction or failure on the part of the manufacturer or producer or conscious or deliberate withholding of information when the manufacturer knew otherwise, is required before it is saddled with any liability, before (sic beyond) the period of six months. Whether in a particular set of facts and circumstances there was any fraud or collusi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... any v. Collector of Central Excise, Bombay [1995 (78) E.L.T. 401 (S.C.)], it was held that mere omission to disclose the correct information would not amount to suppression of facts unless there was a deliberate attempt made to escape the payment of duty. Where facts are known to both the parties it cannot be held that there was suppression of facts. It was observed in Para 4 as follows : 4. Section 11A empowers the Department to re-open proceedings if the levy has been short-levied or not levied within six months from the relevant date. But the proviso carves out an exception and permits the authority to exercise this power within five years from the relevant date in the circumstances mentioned in the proviso, one of it being suppression o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
