9911796707
TMI Blog1998 (2) TMI 235X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... m, Member (T)]. In this appeal filed by M/s. Methodex Systems Ltd., the matter relates to the demand of central excise duty in respect of the products which the appellants had classified under Heading No. 83.04 and which the Revenue had sought to classify under Heading No. 94.03. The Collector of Central Excise, Indore, who had adjudicated the matter had classified the products under Heading ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... notice with regard to the suppression, the following observations had been made : And whereas by suppression the noticee had intention to clear the goods valued at Rs. 2,79,647.97 without payment of duty to the tune of Rs. 44,044.54. Considering the non-accountal of production as technical breach of rules the Assistant Collector (Preventive) on 23-8-1989 had ordered release of goods with the di ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... had observed as under : I do not agree with the contention of the noticee that the differential duty cannot be demanded with retrospective effect inasmuch as this is a case of suppression of facts and the noticee had never disclosed the facts to the Department that the goods in question were designed to be placed on the floor or ground. We consider that this observation alone is not enough ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
