Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

1991 (11) TMI 140

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ading 3215.00 (after 1-3-1986). All the classification lists were approved by the Jurisdictional Assistant Collector except classification list No. 2/32/86 dated 15-4-1986 which was approved provisionally on 23-9-1986. Permission to work under Rule 56B of the Central Excise Rules was also granted on 7-4-1984 and on the basis of the same the appellants cleared the printing ink media to their factory at Vakola, Bombay for further processing. Samples were drawn of the following items viz. 1.MM-3 ODD-1675 9. 2.MM-25 ODD-1837/4 10. 3.Gloss-22 ODD-995 11. 4.Gloss-31 ODD-1737 12. 5.Gloss-35 ODD-702 13. 6.SSP63/1 14. ODD-1017 & 7. 535/120 15. 155-med 8. QS-20 The test reports revealed that the said products .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the product in question did not fall within the purview of either TI 14 or TI 15A. The Department had also written to-the appellants in February 1976 that they need not file classification lists once printing ink media was non-excisable. In 1982 the appellants applied for permission to avail of Chapter X procedure and right from 1983 filed classification lists claiming exemption under Notification 118/75 which were approved by the Department. The appellants submit that in view of the above they cannot be held guilty of any suppression of manufacture and clearance of the disputed items. 4. The records before us reveal that right from 1972 the Department was seized of the issue of the classification of printing ink media. On 12th October 197 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 118/75 - this classification list was approved on 29-10-1981. The Assistant Collector passed an order dropping the demand for duty on printing ink mediums for the period from June 1977 to July 1981 holding that the products falling under TI 68 were exempt under Notification 118/75 dated 30-4-1975. On 20-11-1981 a certificate was issued by the Superintendent of Central Excise to the effect that exemption in respect of printing ink media had been allowed by the Assistant Collector by approval of the classification list classifying the items under TI 68. The appellants had applied on 22-3-1982 to avail of Chapter X Procedure, consequent upon the amendment of Notification 118/75-CE by 105/82 dated 28-2-1982, in respect of printing ink media and .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... of course, they make out a case that they genuinely believed in, and had the conviction about, what they declared. The Department's approval of classification list filed by the assessee, believing it to be true and correct does not ipso facto absolve the assessee of wilful mis-declaration." The Tribunal has taken the view in the case of Collector of Central Excise v. Muzaffar Nagar Steels reported in 1989 (44) E.L.T. 552 that "approval of classification list is an important part of the assessment and therefore, the Assistant Collector is required to be careful and is expected to apply his mind before according approval. He is entitled to and indeed required to make such enquiries and summon such information as may be called for in order to .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... or additional duty under the revised classification could be held enforceable only with effect from the date of issue of show cause notice. The learned Senior Counsel however fairly stated that for the purpose of this case it would be sufficient if the demand covered by the show cause notice is held to be time barred. Following the ratio of the Tribunal's decisions supra, we hold that the demand for the period upto 1-3-1986 is barred by limitation. However, in view of the change in the Tariff from 1-3-1986 and in view of the fact that the assessees were put on notice regarding classification for the post March 86 period by provisional approval of the classification list for the period subsequent to 1-3-1986 and further, in view of the fact .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates