TMI Blog2023 (7) TMI 762X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ral Excise, Durgapur Division about the final cancellation of the contracts by the customer and appended the orders of cancellation of contracts issued by the customer along with the final MOU. As per the said MOU, the appellant received the payment. As the show-cause notice has been issued to the appellant on 10.10.2007 by invoking the extended period of limitation, in that circumstances, it is held that as all the information were available to the Department in 2003 itself and no information has been suppressed by the appellants, in that circumstances also, the show-cause notice issued after the period of four years of the information gathered is not sustainable and is highly barred by limitation. All the demands are barred by limit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rted. 2.2 However, due to financial crisis, the customer partly cancelled one contract on 19.08.1994 and issued the Order of Cancellation WBPDCL/ 10 dated 18.03.1997 to terminate the unexecuted portion of such contract to mutually agree on the amount of damages payable in this regard. 2.3 Soon thereafter, the customer advised the Appellant to temporarily halt the second contract as well and also refrain from procuring fresh inputs in this regard. Till such date, the Appellant duly discharged excise duty on all the goods manufactured and cleared from their premises. 2.4 On similar footing, the customer issued Order for Cancellation WBPDCL/ Plng/ BkTPP4 5/ 4686 dated 30.12.2002 to terminate the unexecuted portion of the second contra ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 19,323 6,71,85,442 16,96,04,765 2.6 As per the Final MOU, the following was mutually agreed between the parties: a. Damages: The amount of damages payable to the Appellant was mutually agreed to be made on account of unpaid supply, services and expenses incurred by the Appellant. b. Remainder of goods: The raw materials, work-in-progress and finished goods lying at the premise of the Appellant would be handed over to the customer. At the time of such clearance, the Appellant discharged applicable excise duty on finished goods/ WIP, in terms of the MOU, incidence whereof was borne by the customer. Such payment of duty was appropriately disclosed in the ER-1 return file ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... xair India Ltd., 2008 (223) E.L.T. 596 (Tri. Chennai) (ix) CCE, Jamshepur v. Bhagwati Oxygen Ltd., 2000 (117) E.L.T. 647 (Tribunal) He, therefore, submits that the duty is not leviable on damages received as a result of cancellation of agreement. 4. Finally, he submitted that extended period of limitation is not invokable in the facts and circumstances of the cases. 5. Heard the parties and perused the records. 6. We find that in this case, the show-cause notice has been issued by invoking extended period of limitation as the facts that the appellant has submitted all the material information to the Department through their letter dated 10.05.2002 about non-receipt of two contracts and thereafter, vide their subsequ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
