Tax Management India. Com
                        Law and Practice: A Digital eBook ...

Category of Documents

TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Case Laws Acts Notifications Circulars Classification Forms Manuals SMS News Articles
Highlights
D. Forum
What's New

Share:      

        Home        
 

TMI Blog

Home List
← Previous Next →

2020 (3) TMI 309

..... LD THAT:- It is very clear from the ruling of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE VERSUS CHEMPHAR DRUGS & LINIMENTS [1989 (2) TMI 116 - SUPREME COURT] that something positive other than mere inaction or failure on the part of the manufacturer, conscious or deliberate withholding of information when the manufacturer knew otherwise is required before he is saddled with any liability. In the present case, Revenue has alleged that there was suppression on the part of the appellant due to non-registering themselves with the Department. The said reason is not sufficient to invoke extended period of limitation. When Revenue came to know about the manufacture of packaged drinking water by the appellant in the month of .....

X X X X X X X

Full Text of the Document

X X X X X X X

..... and thereby deliberately evaded payment of Central Excise Duty. Through the said Show Cause Notice, Central Excise Duty demand of around ₹ 98 lakhs was raised against the appellant. It was also proposed to appropriate an amount of ₹ 10 lakhs paid before issue of Show Cause Notice. Further, there were proposals for imposition of penalties. 2.2 On contest by the appellant, the said Show Cause Notice was adjudicated through impugned Order-in-Original. The Learned Original Authority held that the appellant did not initiate any steps to get required clarification from the Department to discharge their statutory duty of getting registered including observance of due procedures and payment of duty and therefore, the appellants were gu .....

X X X X X X X

Full Text of the Document

X X X X X X X

..... on ble Supreme Court in the case of Collector of Central Excise v. M/s. Chemphar Drugs & Liniments reported in 1989 (40) E.L.T. 276 (S.C.) and submitted that Hon ble Supreme Court have held that mere non-submission of information is not sufficient to prove suppression, but a positive act is required with a deliberate intention to prove suppression. He has submitted that the Show Cause Notice was based on the information available in the books of accounts of the appellant and therefore, there was no suppression of facts. He has further submitted that there were divergent views in the field on whether packaged drinking water is actually mineral water or not and the Central Board of Excise and Customs had to issue some clarification in thi .....

X X X X X X X

Full Text of the Document

X X X X X X X

..... sstatement or suppression or contravention of any provision of any Act, is a question of fact depending upon the facts and circumstances of a particular case. The Tribunal came to the conclusion that the facts referred to hereinbefore do not warrant any inference of fraud. The assessee declared the goods on the basis of their belief of the interpretation of the provisions of the law that the exempted goods were not required to be included and these did not include the value of the exempted goods which they manufactured at the relevant time. The Tribunal found that the explanation was plausible, and also noted that the Department had full knowledge of the facts about manufacture of all the goods manufactured by the respondent when the declar .....

X X X X X X X

Full Text of the Document

X X X X X X X

 

 

← Previous Next →

 

 

|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || Database || Members || Refer Us ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.
|| Blog || Site Map - Recent || Site Map ||