Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2018 (4) TMI 286

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... is reverted to jurisdictional Commissioner for requantification of demand within the normal time limit. - E/MlSC/20986/2016, E/230/2003-DB - 20336/2018 - Dated:- 2-3-2018 - Ms. RUKMANI ME-NON, Advocate, For the Appellant Shri N, Jagadish, Superintendent(AR), For the Respondent SHRI SS GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI V. PADMANABHAN, TECHNICAL MEMBER Per: V. PADMANABHAN The present case is being taken up by the Tribunal as per the directions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of BPL Ltd. Vs. CCE in Civil Appeal No.5523 6037 of 2004, the same has been reported in 2015-TIOL-99-SC-CX. 2. Brief facts of the case are that M/S. BPL Ltd. was engaged in the manufacture of excisable goods falling under Chapter 85 and 90 at their factory In Palghat the dispute is for the period January 1997 to march 1998 in respect of two models of DC Defibrillators which were manufactured in their Palghat factory. M/S. BPL filed classification declaration from time to time claiming the classification of the item under CETH 9018. They also claimed the exemption under Notification No.8/96 dt. 23/07/1996 as well as the succeeding Notification No.4/97 dt 01/03/1997. Th .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ision rendered by the majority, it will now be for the Tribunal to consider the issue of limitation. The issue of limitation is before us for de novo decision as per the observation of the Hon'ble Supreme Court as above. 4. With the above background, we heard Smt. Rukmani Menon, learned counsel for the appellant as well as Shri N. Jagadish, Superintendent(AR) for the Revenue. 5. The submission of the learned counsel for M/S. BPL is summarized below: - i. she conceded that the Issue on merit has been decided against the appellant. However she argued that there is no justification for the invocation of the larger period of limitation in the present case. She submitted that even though M/S. BPL has specifically challenged the order of the Tribunal on the question of limitation, the Apex Court chose not to give any elaborate findings on this subject. ii. She submitted that the goods manufactured by BPL were capable of use as both internal as well as external Defibrillators. In support of her contention, she referred to the copy of the expert opinion obtained by M/S. BPL which were submitted before the authorities below. iii. The learned advocate submitted that .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ginal dispute was regarding the benefit of exemption under Notification No 8/96 as well as the succeeding notification No.4/97. The issue on merits has been decided against the assessee by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. But the Apex Court has directed the Tribunal to readjudicate the issue on limitation, 8. The adjudicating authority in his original order dt. 22/02/2003 has observed in para 25 that the assessee has suppressed the fact that the equipments manufactured by them are intended for external use only, whereas the benefit available under the notification is only for Defibrillators meant for internal use. He has referred to the declaration filed by the assessee under the erstwhile Rule 173B and observed that the assessee has misdeclared that the goods are for internal use which were found to be otherwise only upon scrutiny of the operating manual and enquiries conducted by the Department. 9. It has been argued before us on behalf of the assessee that the goods have been declared as DC Defibrillators Model No.DF2389R with recorded and without recorder . In the declaration paper, the assessee has neither declared the same as for internal use nor as for external use. How .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... f such nuts was not merely fastening but also facilitating the flow of oil under high pressure without leakage. It was emphasised that these nuts were leak proof.The Tribunal on appraisement of all the materials, held that these were nuts manufactured by the appellant. It was evident from the Tribunal's judgment that the appellant was itself Purchasing, both threaded and unthreaded nuts as such and the unthreaded nuts were threaded by the appellant. Apart from captive consumption, some of these nuts were also sold as nuts to outside Parties. These facts were found by the Tribunal and recorded in its order. The Tribunal in those circumstances was of the view that it was difficult to accept the appellant's contention. The impugned goods were commercially known and bought and sold as nuts. It is true that specification of the Indian Standard Institution was drawn attention toe But there was evidence, as noted by the Tribunal, about the commercial identity of these goods. If these goods not being defined as such and are commercially known as nuts, as found by the Tribunal, then, in our opinion, such finding cannot be said to be wrong or Perverse. Such finding was arrived at aft .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates