2018 (4) TMI 898

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... t. (A.R) for respondent Per : Ramesh Nair Brief facts of the case are that the Appellant is manufacturer of excisable goods i.e Hydrogen gas falling under chapter 23 and 29 of the CETA. They are supplying hydrogen gas to M/s Nocil through the pipe line. They were also charging maintenance and operating charges on such pipeline owned and maintained by them from M/s NOCIL. Demands were raised vide .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e ratio of Apex Court judgment of JCB Ltd, supra is not applicable. He also submits that the charges were recovered by debit notes and not through invoices. The Appellant has suppressed the facts as the same was not brought into the knowledge of the department and hence the demand made by invoking extended period is sustainable. He also relied upon the judgment in case of Madras Refineries Ltd. 20 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... were mentioning about separate recovery of maintenance and operation charges. Further in absence of any fact showing malafide intention of Appellant to evade payment of duty, we are of view that the demand raised by invoking extended period is not sustainable. Hence we uphold the demand for the normal period and rest of the demand is set aside. The penalty imposed under Section 11AC is also set a .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X