9911796707
TMI Blog1997 (12) TMI 390X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (T)]. Vide show cause notice dated 31-7-1986, it was alleged that the present appellants had evaded duty amounting to Rs. 6,50,884.55. This demand arose on three different counts. The Collector, in his impugned order, dropped the proceedings in respect of two counts but confirmed the demand amounting to Rs. 9,26,991.70. The ground for sustaining this demand was that the assessees had removed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ary and March, 1984. He stated that the extended period invoked by the show cause notice was not sustainable and that the demand was hit by limitation. He stated that vide two letters dated 1-2-1984 and 7-2-1984, the assessees had informed the department that due to several complaints on account of bad quality, the assessees had desired to repack/reprocess the yarn already deposited in the BSR. Th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the facts at all times, the extended period could not be invoked. 3. Shri Santhanam also argued on merits. 4. Ld. DR defended the Collector s order on his logic. 5. We have carefully considered the submissions made before us. The Collector observed that these letters should not be taken to be due intimations. We have carefully perused the copies of these letters available in the paper bo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ble to sustain the Collector s belief that the assessees had indulged in suppression of any material aspect with the intent to evade duty. This demand must fail on the point of limitation alone. Since we have so decided, we do not see any necessity to go into the merits of the action of the assessees. Since the demand for the extended period does not sustain, we do not find any reason to sustain t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
