2005 (11) TMI 111 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues involved: Limitation period for demand of duty, intention to evade payment of duty, contradictory observations on penalty.

In the judgment by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, Mumbai, the issue of the demand of duty amounting to Rs. 2,96,774 being unsustainable due to limitation was addressed. The Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals) noted the absence of mala fide intent by the appellants to evade duty payment. However, the Commissioner invoked a larger period of limitation for penalty. The Tribunal found the observations on confirmation of demand and penalty to be contradictory, as the appellants had sought clarification from the Assistant Commissioner before clearing the goods, indicating no intention to evade payment. Consequently, the confirmation of demand on the point of limitation was set aside, and the appeal was allowed with relief to the appellants.