TMI Blog2019 (2) TMI 744X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y of production as component parts. The Adjudicating Authority is directed to quantify the demand, if any, which survives within the normal time limit in respect of SCN dt. 03/08/1992 - Penalty set aside - appeal allowed in part. - Appeal No. E/226/2009 - FO/75182/2019 - Dated:- 10-1-2019 - SHRI P. K. CHOUDHARY, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) And SHRI V. PADMANABHAN, MEMBER (TECHNICAL) Shri N. K. Chowdhary, Advocate for the Appellant Shri A. Roy, Suptd. (A. R.) for the Revenue ORDER PER CORAM The appeal is against the Order-in-original No. 1- 2/Commr/Bol/09 dated 23/01/2009. 2. The appellant is a unit of Central Government under the Ministry of Railways. The period under dispute is from March 1986 to June 1992 duri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... houdhary, Ld. Advocate for the appellant as well as Shri A. Roy, Ld. DR for the Revenue. 4. The Ld. Advocate submitted that the demand raised against the appellant was not justified for the following reasons:- (i) The parts of Electric Motors manufactured were cleared to various zones of the Railways. No sale is involved in such transfer of goods. Accordingly, he submitted that such use of the motors are to be considered as captive consumption and should be extended the benefit of the exemption under Notification 67/1986. (ii) He also submitted that there can be no allegation of suppression against Chittranjan Locomotive Works which is nothing but a unit of Ministry of Railways. He also submitted that the Department has failed to p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... duty. Hence, the demand is to be reiterated within normal time limit. 8. We note that once a Show Cause dated 04/02/1991 has been issued alleging the suppression clause, the Department is pre-cluded from issuing another Show Cause Notice by again invoking the longer time limit in view of the decision of the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Nizam Sugar Factory reported in 2006 (197) ELT 465 (SC). 9. Now we examine the issue on merits is considered. In respect of the parts of motors cleared outside the appellant s factory for use in various zones of the Railways, we are of the view that the benefit of Notification No. 67/86 will not be available in asmuchas the benefit can be extended only to parts which are used in the factory of p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
