1994 (6) TMI 89 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues involved: Appeal against order alleging manufacturing of crushed limestone without Central Excise License and duty payment.

Summary:
1. The appellants were engaged in crushing limestone for civil construction without Central Excise License. The Collector held this activity amounted to manufacturing and confirmed duty evasion, invoking proviso to Section 11A.

2. Appellants cited Madhya Pradesh High Court judgment, accepting limestone crushing as manufacture, and argued bona fide belief due to conflicting court decisions. They contested the extended period invocation under Section 11A as illegal.

3. Respondent argued appellants, under 'Self Removal Procedure,' failed to declare manufacturing activity, leading to duty evasion. Cited case laws to support the extended period invocation under Section 11A.

4. Tribunal noted the High Court's judgment on limestone crushing as manufacture and the issue of bona fide belief due to conflicting court views. Referenced Supreme Court ruling on duty liability in cases of doubt. Concluded the extended period invocation for duty confirmation was not sustainable due to the appellants' bona fide belief.

5. Based on the above analysis, the impugned order was modified to recover duty within the normal six-month period from the date of demand/Show Cause Notice. The appeal was disposed of accordingly.