TMI Blog2017 (8) TMI 894X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... production of the documents before adjudicating authority. Therefore, it is not practically possible to appreciate plea of the appellant that it had charged amount lower than the amount charged through debit notes, in absence of documents produced before Tribunal. Time limitation - Held that: - adjudication cannot be said to be time-barred when there was deliberate suppression of sale value in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2. It was further appreciated on 26/05/2017 that the price charged by the appellant from its customers through the debit notes was much higher than the sale price claimed to have been charged by it from its consumers. It was an admitted fact on record that without any controversy, goods were cleared from the appellant's premises at a value to the customers and right over the goods passed b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... do so. Income tax audit report under Section 44AB of the Income Tax Act, 1963 does not explain the above controversy. 4. Records demonstrate non-production of the above said documents before adjudicating authority. Therefore, on the above facts, it is not practically possible to appreciate plea of the appellant that it had charged amount lower than the amount charged through debit notes, in abs ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hands. It did not substantiate its stand placing any evidence. All along it had kept Revenue in dark raising plea of filing of returns without disclosing proper assessable value. Even the return did not disclose proper assessable value which was price charged from customers by the appellant. Thus, adjudication cannot be said to be time-barred when there was deliberate suppression of sale value in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
