9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (6) TMI 592X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eal for the period September 2011 (for which period the assessee is in instant appeal before us) has been decided in their favour vide Final Order no. 76379/2019 passed in Excise Appeal no. 75291 of 2018. While allowing the instant application for early hearing, we are taking up the matter for final disposal with the consent of both sides. 2. The assessee has preferred the instant appeal against demand of central excise duty of Rs. 24,29,726/- alongwith equal penalty and applicable interest confirmed vide Order-in-Original dated 27.03.2018 passed by the learned Assistant Commissioner, Central Excise, Singur Division, while adjudicating the impugned Show Cause Notice 19.09.2016. The said adjudication order has been upheld by the learned Com ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s a matter of fact that whatever may be the procedure adopted and if it contravenes the law, the Department should have taken prompt action. The Department though in the know of things on 14-6-2004, allowed the assessee to avail of the benefit of the above Notification. The Tribunal found that the returns were filed in which the assessee indicated that it effected advance Domestic Tariff Area clearances under Notification No. 23/2003. Thus the fact was known to the Department and hence issuing a show cause notice dated 3-7-2009 covering a period April, 2004 to March, 2006 was barred. 4. These very facts were, therefore, appreciated by the Tribunal and in arriving at the conclusion that the show cause notice and the proceedings in pursuan ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g such Returns to easily verify the total quantity of goods manufactured, exported and cleared in DTA. Further, details of excise notification number and also serial number of the notification availed for DTA sales shown at Clause 4A of the Return would also enable the Central Excise officers receiving and assessing the Returns to check up whether the exemption availed of was in order or not. Therefore, the Revenue's contention that the details submitted in ER-2 Returns were not sufficient enough to find out whether the respondents exceeded the permissible limit of DTA clearance is not tenable in law. Further, the format of ER-2 Returns is prescribed by the Government and, therefore, an assessee cannot be accused of suppression of facts if ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
