9911796707
TMI Blog2009 (6) TMI 270X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... es had suppressed anything from the department so as to make the extended period of limitation available to the department. - In the cross-objection filed by respondents, no relief is sought for as the impugned order is entirely in their favour. The cross-objection is, therefore, to be treated as comments on and reply to the Revenue’s appeal and is, accordingly, dismissed. - E/635/2002 - 733/2009 - Dated:- 18-6-2009 - Ms. Jyoti Balasundaram, Vice-President and Shri P. Karthikeyan, Member (T) Cross Objection No. E/CO/2/2003 Shri V.V. Hariharan, JCDR, for the Appellant. Shri H.G. Dharmadhikari, Advocate, for the Respondent. [Order per: Jyoti Balasundaram, Vice-President]. - The assessees herein are engaged in the manufa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to the sugar syrup, the solid soluble content of sugar is not in excess of 65% and such percentage would render the product unstable with limited shelf life (although test report shows that solid soluble content of sugar is a little over 67%, ld. counsel for the respondents submits that this is due to the testing being carried out by Lane and Eynon method which is not a reliable method and the correct method of testing was the Refractory Index method as prescribed by BIS and if such method was adopted for testing, the solid soluble content of sugar would be less than 65%), we find that we are able to dispose of this appeal on the limited question of time-bar. The finding of the Commissioner (Appeals) on this aspect is contained in para 9(c) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ges reported in 2001 (128) E.L.T. 75 (T) = 2001 (42) RLT 740, (relied upon in the present impugned order for setting aside the demand on merits), the Tribunal upheld the finding of the Commissioner (Appeals) that since L4 licence and the ground plan clearly showed that intermediate product 'sugar syrup' arose in the manufacture of fruit pulp based beverages, it cannot be said that the assessees had suppressed anything from the department so as to make the extended period of limitation available to the department. Therefore, the finding of the Commissioner (Appeals) in the present order on limitation is in consonance with the finding of the Tribunal in the Venkatesh Beverages case cited supra and following the same we uphold the finding of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
