TMI Blog2018 (1) TMI 1258X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... enue. If that be so, the factum of collection of differential consideration, without its disclosure to the authorities, would lead to only one inevitable conclusion that there was malafide on the part of the assessee so as to evade payment of duty - extended period rightly invoked - appeal dismissed - decided against appellant. - E/257/2010 - 42643/2017 - Dated:- 1-11-2017 - Smt. Archana Wadhwa, Judicial Member And Shri Madhu Mohan Damodhar, Member (Technical) Ms. Minchu Mariam Punnoose, Adv., for the appellant Shri S. Govindarajan, AC (AR), for the Respondents ORDER Per: Arachana Wadhwa After hearing both sides duly represented by Ld. Advocate, Ms. Minchu Mariam Punnoose and Ld. AR, Shri S. Govindrajan, AC, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f longer period. 2. On going through the records, we find that lower authority, on the point of limitation, has observed as under:- There is sufficient evidence on record that M/s. Giridhar had been clearing paints and thinners to industrial consumers and is corroborated by the statements of various buyers. The contraventions of Section 4 and Section 4A(1) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 alleged in the Show Cause Notice are substantiated by the documents. Section 4A (1) of the Central Excise Act, 1944, which specifies the goods for MRP based assessment, categorically stipulates that the goods specified for MRP based assessment are subject to the requirement under the Standards of Weights and Measurements Act, 1976 or the rules made ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t differential consideration of the goods cleared by the appellant was being collected by them in their commercial invoices so raised, does not stand denied by the appellant. Further, the fact of such collection was never reflected by them in any of the statutory records filed before the department and was never brought to the notice of the Revenue. If that be so, the factum of collection of differential consideration, without its disclosure to the authorities, would lead to only one inevitable conclusion that there was malafide on the part of the assessee so as to evade payment of duty. In such a scenario, the ingredients of Section 11A (1) proviso stand satisfied thus justifying invocation of longer period of limitation. 3. As such, we ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
