9911796707
TMI Blog1985 (1) TMI 151X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e records and upon hearing the arguments of Shri J.B. Koshy, Advocate for the appellant and upon hearing the arguments of Shri J.M.K. Sekhar, Senior Departmental Representative for the respondent, the Tribunal makes the following Order : 3. This is a transferred case in terms of section 35P of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944, the proceedings having started as a revision against the order of the Appellate Collector of Central Excise, Madras, referred to supra. The relevant facts of the case may be summarised as follows : The appellants were availing set off of duty paid on inputs used in the manufacture of tyres and tubes under Notification No. 178/77 dated 18-6-1977. On 4-6-1979, notification No. 178/77 came to be superseded by n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ribed in clause 4 of the appendix to the notification. The Assistant Collector of Central Excise, Ernakulam-I Division, finally decided that the appellants will have to pay the first sum and the credit of the second sum in R.G. 23 account was also disallowed vide his order C. No. V/16/30/69/80 dated 9-11-1981. When the Appellate Collector considered this order in appeal, he found that to the extent finished goods have been cleared on payment of less duty than what was due, upto 27-8-1979 (reckoning six months prior to the date of issue of the show cause notice, viz. 27-2-1980), the demand of the Asstt. Collector was barred by limitation under Rule 10 itself. However, in respect of the balance, he went on to observe that for the amount which ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e appellants, the requirement of declaration under para 2 of the appendix may be deemed to have been made. 5. The learned Senior Departmental Representative, on the other hand, relies on the reasoning contained in the order of the Appellate Collector in support of the Department s case. 6. We note that the show cause notice makes a demand in terms of Rule 10 which would pre-suppose that finished goods had been cleared without payment of the full duty payable thereon. It is on record that the appellants were not aware of the provisions of the notification No. 201/79 till 20-7-1979. It is more than confirmed by the letter OC No. 1136/79 dated 25-7-1979 of the Superintendent of Central Excise, Kalamassery extracted earlier. Hence the plea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
