TMI Blog2019 (8) TMI 316X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fication. There was a conscious decision to change classification after 2000. In invoice/ declaration prior to 01.04.2000, they have correctly classified and alter they have changed the classification - Thus, it is apparent that appellant had no bonafide belief otherwise - the extended period of limitation has rightly been invoked. Since the appellant are contesting the issue only on limitation, the appeal filed by the appellant is rejected. - Excise Appeal No. 691 of 2011 - FINAL ORDER NO. A/11475 / 2019 - Dated:- 6-8-2019 - MR. RAMESH NAIR, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) AND MR. RAJU, MEMBER (TECHNICAL) Shri Amal Dave, Advocate for the Appellant Shri K.J. Kinariwala, Assistant Commissioner (AR) for the Respond ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e been invoked to demand duty under Section 4 in respect of the product Manhole Cover which they were cleared under Section 4A by declaring the product classified under heading 7324. In Para 6 of the show cause notice where it has been acknowledged that they had vide letter dated 26.09.2009 addressed to the jurisdictional Range Superintendent, indicated the product manufactured by them is being cleared/ dispatched in a set of Manhole Cover along with its frame. In the said letter it was also informed that they were printing MRP on the said Manhole Cover. 4. Ld. Counsel relied on the following decisions:- (a) Stadmed Pvt. Limited vs. CCE, Lucknow 2017 (349) ELT 312 (Tri. All.) (b) CCE Delhi vs. Ishaa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d 04.01.2000 issued by them showing classification as 7325.10. He argued that the case law relied upon by the appellant is related to the issue where the appellant had bonafide doubt regarding classification. He argued that the in the instant case, the appellants were aware in the year 1999/2000 that the correct classification of the product is 7325.10 they themselves changed the classification as 7324 later on. 6. We have gone through the rival submissions. We find that the issue is being contested only on limitation. The appellant argued that they were not sure of the classification and they had doubt which resulted in non-payment of duty. From the facts of the case it is apparent that in 1999, in registration certificate its ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
