1988 (1) TMI 178 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
Liability of Andhra Pradesh State Electricity Board for excise duty on PSCC and RCC poles, Time bar for raising demands, Knowledge of the Department regarding manufacturing activity of the Board, Application of the period of limitation for duty payment, Condonation of delay in filing appeals.

Analysis:
The judgment by the Appellate Tribunal CEGAT, New Delhi addressed various issues concerning the liability of the Andhra Pradesh State Electricity Board for excise duty on PSCC and RCC poles. The appellant sought an adjournment, which was declined due to lack of representation in previous hearings. The issues in all appeals were common, focusing on the liability of the Board for excise duty on manufactured poles without necessary formalities. The demands were raised under Item 68 of the CET for non-payment of duty.

The Tribunal referred to a previous decision on similar facts, confirming the Board as the manufacturer liable for duty under Item 68 CET. The demands were based on a 5-year limitation period for non-payment of duty. However, certain appeals faced time bar challenges. Appeals 2138/84 and 2147/84 were dismissed as time-barred due to filing delays without sufficient cause for condonation.

For the remaining appeals, the Tribunal noted instances where the Department had knowledge of the Board's manufacturing activities before issuing demands. The Tribunal highlighted the incorrect application of the 5-year limitation period, emphasizing the need to consider the date of Department's awareness for duty payment timelines. Appeals 1150/83, 1151/83, and 545/85 were allowed, setting aside lower authorities' orders for reassessment based on correct timelines.

In conclusion, appeals 2138/84 and 2147/84 were dismissed as time-barred, while appeals 1150/83, 1151/83, and 545/85 were allowed for reconsideration by the original authorities. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of determining the Department's awareness date for duty payment timelines and remanded the matters for readjudication in accordance with the correct principles.