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

2000 (3) TMI 246

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... d in the manufacture of various types of blended yarn of the composition of wool of 70% and nylon 15% and viscose 15%. They availed the benefit of Notification No. 224/79-C.E., dated 13-7-1979. But on 5-9-1988 their factory premises were searched and certain record was seized. It revealed from that record that during the period September 1983 to July 1988 they had supplied 95427.900 kgs. of woollen worsted yarn to OCF through DGS D, New Delhi after acceptance of their tender and compliance of the requisite condition. According to the supply orders given to them, the description of the yarn to be supplied by them to OCF through DGS D was worsted 80 TEX/3/Khaki for jerseys with specification No. J D/TC/409(E). The worsted yarn was to be o .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... No. 280/77 as they did not manufacture worsted yarn and the wool tops used were carded and the nylon yarn fabric used by them was obtained from nylon waste and that the plant and machinery with them was not capable of coming the wool tops. They further alleged that the demand was time barred. The Collector, however, did not agree with their contention and confirmed the duty of Rs. 21,40,122.15 and also imposed penalty of Rs. 7 lakhs, on them through the impugned order. 4. The appellant have come in appeal before the Tribunal against the impugned order of the Collector. 5. The learned Counsel for the appellants has assailed the validity of the impugned order mainly on the ground that the removal of the goods by the appellants, had been .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... upply was made by them during the period September 1983 to July 1988. It is not their case that they did not supply the yarn to the OCF according to the terms of the purchase order with the composition of 70% wool and 30% nylon. There is also nothing on the record to suggest if the OCF or the DGS D through whom the supply was made, ever found that the worsted yarn supplied by the appellants was not in conformity the order placed with them. Therefore, it stands conclusively established that the appellants supplied the worsted yarn with the composition of 70% wool and 30% nylon to OCF through DGS D. No plausible explanation has been offered by them as to how they supplied worsted yarn of this composition to the Government department if th .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... and 15% nylon cleverly whereas in reality they manufactured the worsted yarn of the composition of 70% wool and 30% nylon. Therefore, the test reports of the chemical examiner are of no avail to them. If they were not manufacturing the yarn of the composition of 70% wool and 30% nylon, it was not possible for them to give the tender to the DGS D and to accept the order for the supply of the same to the OCF. They had admittedly supplied the worsted yarn of this composition to that department through the DGS D and this circumstance is enough to falsify their plea of having not manufactured the same. 10. There is also no cogent evidence on the record to show that the Revenue department had any knowledge about the manufacture of the wors .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... d period of limitation has been rightly invoked by the Revenue Department. The ratio of law laid down by the Apex Court in CCE, Baroda v. Cotspun Ltd. - 1999 (113) E.L.T. 353 (T) regarding non-availability of extended period of limitation to the department for raising the duty demand for a period of more than six months when the goods had been removed by the assessee under the approved classification lists, is not applicable to the appellants case as they have played fraud on the department and concealed the true facts knowingly, as discussed above. It is well settled principle that one who seeks equity must do equity himself and come to the Court with clean hands. The appellants having clearly played fraud with the Revenue department and .....

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