9911796707
TMI Blog1998 (3) TMI 224X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... K.S. Venkataramani, Member (T)]. The Rectification application is directed against the Tribunal s Final Order No. 336/97/WZB, dated 6-1-1997. The Tribunal in that case decided the eligibility of the applicants to Notification No. 208/83 which exempts final product mentioned therein from duty provided the inputs for the goods are those on which the excise duty leviable has already been paid. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ation application, the ld. Counsel Shri Gujaral submitted that the applicants are re-rollers. On 18-5-1988, the applicants had written to the jurisdictional Supdt. of the Central Excise, stating therein that even though their inputs had been cleared at Nil rate of duty in terms of exemption notification, they are entitled to exemption under Notification No. 208/83 since the appropriate payment of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Supreme Court decision reported in 1981 (8) E.L.T. 613 (S.C.) from which it can be seen that purchase from open market has the same meaning as the purchase from a manufacturer and it was contended by the ld. Counsel that in view of this it cannot be said that there has been misdeclaration on the part of the applicants. Therefore, the Tribunal s conclusion that the longer period can be invoked ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he declaration filed by the applicants did not disclose the crucial information. The receipt of inputs at nil duty gate passes from manufacturers hence amounts to suppression of facts with intention to evade duty. Further the degree of central excise control over non-licenced units which are only to file declaration is not at all rigorous as in the case of licenced unit. 4. We have carefully con ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
