2009 (1) TMI 935 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues involved:
The issues involved in the judgment are the classification of manufactured furniture items as excisable goods, the applicability of longer period of limitation for confirming the demand, and the imposition of penalty and interest under Section 11AC and Section 11AB of the Central Excise Act.

Classification of manufactured furniture items:
The appellant, engaged in interior designing and furnishing, had the demand confirmed for manufacturing and clearing furniture without duty payment. The Commissioner (Appeals) noted that while some items could be considered immovable furniture, the appellant failed to provide evidence supporting their claim. Referring to previous judgments, including one by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order and remanded the matter for re-adjudication based on the settled legal principles.

Applicability of longer period of limitation:
The demand was confirmed by invoking the longer period of limitation. However, the Commissioner (Appeals) granted the benefit of doubt to the appellant regarding the discharge of duty liability, citing genuine causes for dispute and lack of malafide intent. Consequently, the penalty under Section 11AC and interest under Section 11AB were set aside, maintaining only the duty liability. The Tribunal upheld the decision, stating that the extended period of limitation was not applicable due to the findings of the appellate authority remaining unchallenged by the Revenue.