9911796707
TMI Blog1998 (11) TMI 275X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the remand proceedings arising out of the two orders in appeal (1) dated 19-2-1987 and the other dated 24-7-1987 and that the period involved in those proceedings was prior to January, 1985. The period involved in the present proceedings is from January, 1985 to January, 1988 for which the learned Advocate pleaded that no show cause notice was issued. The demand was confirmed without any show cause notice vide addendum to the adjudication order which related to the earlier period. He pleaded that the order in appeal which is impugned in these proceedings is not sustainable as the principles of natural justice had not been followed in raising the demand against the appellants. 2. In reply Shri K. Shiv Kumar, learned JDR stated that the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ter No. EVP/22/87/2060-61, dated 21-2-1987 and Letter No. EVP/22/87/742-43, dated 23-9-1987 wherein they have requested to apply the Collector (Appeals) s order regarding demanding duty on Distribution charges excluding freight for the year 1985. Hence, I also demand duty for Rs. 3,52,839.34 on the total distribution charges of Rs. 39,28,728.00 at 5% and 10% Adv. respectively. However, I allow them the benefit of excluding freight charges from the above amount. They should furnish the said particulars to the Supdt. Central Excise Range II/Inspector Central Excise I/ M/s. Balaji Vegetable Products (P) Ltd. Sitapur Sector within 7 days to work out the actual amount recoverable from them. This amount should be paid within 10 days from the date ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t payments for subsequent period also. That admission will not absolve the responsibility of the revenue to raise demands. It is very clear from the proceedings, that the department has not raised any demand for the period January, 1985 to January, 1986 for a sum of Rs. 3,52,839.34. Even the Asst. Collector s letter demanding this amount does not show that the assessment have been kept provisional and this claim is as a result of finalisation of the assessments. It is clear that the department were aware of the dispute pertaining to this demand. Therefore, it cannot be said at this point, that the Assistant Collector s letter demanding this amount can be treated as a show cause notice, for recovery by invoking larger period. Therefore, view ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
