TMI Blog2017 (11) TMI 600X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... therefore in view of the said decision this issue is no longer res integra. Extended period of limitation - Held that: - issue involved was of interpretation of law and there are contrary decision on the issue - also, in case of government undertaking unit malafide intentions cannot be attributed to the assessee - extended period not invokable. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - E/131/08 - A/90351/17/EB - Dated:- 31-10-2017 - Mr Ramesh Nair, Member (Judicial) And Mr. Raju, Member (Technical) Shri. M.H. Patil, Advocate for the Appellants Shri. V.K. Agarwal, Addl. Commissioner(A.R.) for the Respondent ORDER Per : Ramesh Nair The issue involved in the present case is that whether duty payable ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ntical/similar issue (i.e. whether the duty is payable on import parity price or refinery transfer price that petroleum products are sold by one OMC to other OMC) are pending for final decision before the Hon ble Supreme Court, some of which are as under; i) ONGC - Civil Appeal No.8063-8069 of 2010 and Civil Appeal Nos.4197-4199 of 2010 - {Para 10 of Tribunal Larger Bench judgment dated 10.9.2015 in the case of ONGC v/s CCE} ii) IOCL's Civil Appeal No.5686 of 2014 - which tagged with ONGC Civil Appeal No.8063-8069 of 2010 - {from Case Status in Supreme Court} iii) BPCL's Civil Appeal No.5642 of 2009 against Tribunal Order reported in 2009 (242) ELT 358 (T) - {CBEC Circular No.913/3/ 2010- CX dated 3.2.2010 2015 (32 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rcial invoice, therefore in view of the said decision this issue is no longer res integra. As regard the limitation we find that issue involved was of interpretation of law and there are contrary decision on the issue, matter was referred to the larger bench, the Larger bench has resolved the dispute by answering question referred to it. It is settled law that in the judgment of Wonederax Laboratories (supra) which was approved by the Hon ble Supreme Court and in case of Mahindra Mahindra(Supra) that once the matter is referred to the Larger bench, extended period is inapplicable. It is also pertinent to note that appellant is public sector undertaking of government of India therefore it is not proper to assume that government com ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was not suppressed by appellant and it was very much in the public domain and amongst department and therefore extended period is not invokable for differential duty. As regard the order dated 17-7-2017 in case of BPCL relied upon by the A.R., we observed that in the said order all the factual aspect on limitation raised in this case was not available therefore issue of limitation based on the fact varies from one case to another therefore the said order of this tribunal is distinguished. As per our above discussion, though the merit is held against appellant, but demand is not sustainable on limitation. Accordingly, impugned order is set aside being demand hit by limitation. Appeal is allowed. (Pronounced in court on 31/10/2017) - ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
