9911796707
TMI Blog2000 (8) TMI 352X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... es of the appellants on 17-5-91 and found that the appellants had manufactured/fabricated the above structural items in their factory premises. The statement of the Manager (Purchase) of the appellants Company was recorded on 17-5-91 itself. The cost of the items was furnished by the appellants under their letter dated 16-7-91 and a Certificate from the Chartered Accountant was furnished in this regard under letter dated 26-8-91. In reply dated 16-2-94 to the show cause notice, among other grounds, it was pleaded in para-7 of the reply that the demand was time barred. The Collector of Central Excise, Meerut, who adjudicated the matter, did not agree with the contention of the appellants that the demand was time barred and that there was no ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... w, there was no justification. It is seen from the show cause notice dated 6.12.93 that the central excise officers of Division-III, Ghaziabad had visited the factory premises of the appellants on 17-5-91, and noticed that the appellants had manufactured/fabricated three silos, one tank, piping and other structural items at their factory premises. The statement of the Company s Purchase Manager was recorded under Section 14 of the Central Excises Act, 1944, on the spot on 17-5-91 itself. The Purchase Manager in a signed letter on that very date had detailed as how the silos, tank and piping were installed by the Company. It was explained that the processes involved elaborate mechanical jobs, welding, testing, etc. The process of carrying ou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng 1380 pages, and one folder and one file containing 240 pages were resumed on 17-5-91 itself (refer page 29 of the paper book). Information regarding the market value was called by the Superintendent of the Central Excise on 21-5-91 and the information was furnished by the appellants under their letter dated 16-7-91 (refer page 33 of the paper book). It was followed by a Certificate from the Chartered Accountant on 26-8-91. 4. It is seen that the show cause notice was issued on 6-12-93 after more than two years after all the relevant information had been furnished by the appellants. 5. In para 6.3. of the show cause notice, it had been stated as under:- It also appears that the party suppressed the facts regarding manufacture of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cord. The stainless steel tank was rolled, welded and lifted at 13.1 Metre high for its installation. Similarly, silos also were erected and welded at 13.1 Metre high. The structurals were of such a nature that their fabrication, erection and installation could not be hidden. 6. We also consider that the way the processes undertaken have been described in letter dated 17-5-91 of the Manager (Purchase) of the party as extracted above in para 3, there could be a genuine doubt in the minds of the appellants that the goods as finally erected were immovable and thus, there could be bona fide belief regarding non-leviability of duty on such structurals. 7. The main manufacturing activity of the appellants was production of Polyester Fibre. Th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
