9911796707
TMI Blog2004 (3) TMI 66X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... te Tribunal dated 24th February, 1998. 2.Briefly stated the facts are as follows :- The Appellants are manufacturing HDPE Woven Tubular Fabrics on Circular Looms. They do this with the aid of power. It is not denied that that fabric would have fallen, at the relevant time, under Tariff Item 54.08. Thereafter, the fabric is cut and one end of the fabric is sewed up without the aid of power and a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ted 31st October, 1991 wherein, it is, inter alia, held as follows :- On the question of time-bar, I agree"11. with the noticee, that having issued a demand in 1988 on similar issue and for identical amount, the question of suppression or misdeclaration would not arise. I also agree with the contention that approval of classification list is a quasi judicial function to be done after making suita ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the entire process was an integral process in the manufacture of sacks. It was held that the extended period of limitation was available. 5.Before us two questions arise (a) whether the extended period of limitation is available, and (b) whether the Appellants are entitled to the benefit of the said Notification. 6.The Collector has given a categoric finding that the earlier Show Cause Notice ra ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ement and that therefore, the extended period under Section 11A could not be invoked. In our view, the principles laid down in5. above case fully apply here. As earlier proceedings in respect of same subject-matter were pending adjudication it could not be said that there was any suppression and the extended period under Section 11A was not available." On the ratio laid down in this judgment it ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
