2015 (10) TMI 1101 - HC - Central Excise

Duty demand u/s 11A - Invocation of extended period of limitation - Held that - Show cause notice was issued to the assessee on 22.04.2003 i.e. beyond the period of one year from the date of clearance of excisable goods invoking proviso to Section 11A of the Act, and the extended period of five years was made applicable. Extended period would apply only in cases where there is suppression of material facts, collusion or any willful mis-statement, etc. made by the assessee. In the instant case, the finding of the Tribunal is categorical that since respondent-company filed all the relevant declarations there was no suppression of the facts. We find that no question as such was raised making an issue that findings recorded by the Tribunal are perverse and based on no material. No material as such was placed before us to take a contra view. It is well-settled that the Tribunal is the last fact finding authority and the High Court is required to accept the findings recorded by the Tribunal except where there is a specific challenge to the findings raising any questions of perversity supported by relevant material. Hence, we see no ground to interfere with the well-reasoned order passed the Tribunal. - Decided against Revenue.

Summary

Issues:
i) Time-barred demand under Section 11A of Central Excise Act, 1944
ii) Willful mis-declaration for duty evasion
iii) Dismissal of appeal by Tribunal
iv) Exemption under notification for goods not specified
v) Strict construction of exemption notifications

Analysis:
The case involved an appeal by the Department against a Final Order passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) regarding the time-barred demand under Section 11A of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The Department raised questions on the validity of the demand, willful mis-declaration by the respondent, dismissal of the appeal by the Tribunal, and the granting of exemption to goods not specified under a notification. The respondent, a manufacturer of material-handling equipment, was issued a Show Cause Notice for irregular exemption availment under a specific notification. The Additional Commissioner confirmed the notice, but the Commissioner (Appeals) later set it aside, stating that the exemption applied to the entire system, not just individual equipment. The Tribunal dismissed the Department's appeal as time-barred, leading to the current appeal.

The Department argued that the Tribunal should have considered all relevant facts and not solely focused on the limitation issue. The respondent contended that no suppression of facts occurred, making the show cause notice time-barred. The High Court examined Section 11A of the Act, emphasizing that the extended period of five years applies only in cases of willful misstatement or suppression of facts. Since the respondent had filed all relevant declarations, the Tribunal found no suppression. The Court noted that unless specific challenges with supporting material are raised against the Tribunal's findings, they must be accepted. As no such challenges were presented, the Court upheld the Tribunal's decision as well-reasoned and dismissed the appeal.

In conclusion, the High Court found no grounds to interfere with the Tribunal's order, as the respondent had not suppressed any material facts. The appeal was deemed meritless and dismissed, with no costs awarded. Any pending Miscellaneous Petitions were disposed of as infructuous in light of the appeal's dismissal.