9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
1991 (4) TMI 257 - AT - Central Excise
Issues: Application for dispensation of pre-deposit of duty and penalty based on alleged suppression of facts by the applicants.
Analysis: The applicants sought dispensation of pre-deposit of duty and penalty totaling Rs. 6,53,058.37 and Rs. 1,06,162.28, respectively, imposed by the Collector of Central Excise. The applicants had initially classified their products, actuators and parts of actuators, separately, which were approved by the lower authority in 1987 and 1988. The audit party and authorities had endorsed the classification lists without raising doubts. However, a subsequent show cause notice demanded reclassification of goods under different headings, alleging suppression. The Assistant Collector issued another notice alleging suppression and misdeclaration of goods. The applicants argued they had provided detailed information with the classification lists and had paid duty upon reclassification. They denied any mala fides or suppression, emphasizing the authorities' endorsement of the initial classification lists. The learned SDR contended that the applicants had suppressed facts by misdeclaring goods and furnishing incomplete information. The lower authority upheld the suppression allegations. However, the Tribunal observed that the applicants had accurately described their products in the classification lists, including the uses of Valve Actuators. The Tribunal noted that there was no requirement to provide construction particulars in the lists. The applicants had also submitted catalogues and literature. The Tribunal found no evidence of misleading information or suppression. It concluded that the authorities did not seek additional information or express doubts regarding the descriptions provided. Therefore, the Tribunal held that there was no suppression of information on the applicants' part, attributing any perceived suppression to the authorities' lack of understanding. Consequently, the Tribunal allowed the applicants' plea for waiver of pre-deposit of duty and penalty. As the appeal was a Special Bench appeal, the papers were directed to be forwarded to the Central Registry, CEGAT, New Delhi for further proceedings.
|
