9911796707
TMI Blog2000 (8) TMI 323X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The adjudicating authority had disallowed Modvat credit taken by the applicants to the extent of Rs. 3,41,587.47 for the period June 1993 to March 1994 and Rs. 28,942.00 for the month of June 1994, on the ground of improper declaration. The authority also imposed a penalty of Rs.30,000.00 on the party under Rule 173Q. The appeal filed by the aggrieved party against the order of adjudication was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the declaration filed for the purpose of availment of credit during period 1993-94, the final product was mentioned as P P Medicine (Chapter sub-heading 3003.10). When this was objected to by the Department; the party filed a revised declaration giving full description of the final products, but without mentioning the tariff heading of each and every final product. The applicants opted out of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d. Ld. JDR has opposed the prayer for complete waiver of pre-deposit for which purpose he has reiterated the observations and findings recorded by the lower authorities. 3. The short issue is whether the Modvat credits taken by the applicants are inadmissible to them on the sole ground that the final products were not fully described or the Tariff sub-headings corresponding to the various final ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... facts on the part of the applicants with intent to evade payment of duty. Whether there was suppression of facts is a question of fact which has to be gone into, in the appeal. The plea of limitation is also, therefore, contentious in the appeal. In view of these facts and circumstances, I find a strong prima facie case in favour of the appellants. As regards financial hardships, ld. Advocate has ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
