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

2001 (5) TMI 281

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ilable to material handling equipments and measuring and checking instruments manufactured by them. 2. Shri R. Swaminathan, ld. Consultant, submitted, that the Appellants manufacture Motor Vehicle and parts thereof; that they also manufacture material handling equipments like lifting tackes, trolleys, conveyors, carriers, loading-unloading equipments, etc., and measuring and checking equipments for captive use; that before the introduction of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985, all these items were exempt under Notification 118/75-C.E.; that after introduction of new Tariff these were exempt under Notification No. 217/86 as these were capatively used in or in relation to the manufacture of the finished goods; that in view of the decision .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... onal Collector for such action as deemed fit by him; that in the meantime Superintendent of Central Excise issued straight way a letter dated 29-3-1989 for demanding duty for the period from 1-7-1988 to 30-12-1988 without issuing any show cause notices and without any allegation of suppression, mis-statement, etc.; that on appeal, this demand was also set aside by Collector (Appeals) under Order No. R-153/PN/89, dated 19-2-1990 holding that it was issued in violation of the principles of natural justice and demand being beyond 6 months period had to be issued by the Collector. In this case also Collector (Appeals) directed the lower authority to put up the papers to the Jurisdictional Collector for such action as deemed fit by him; that the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... itself for adjudication by the Collector; that the contention of the Collector that both the cases were remanded to him by the Collector (Appeals) is erroneous. The ld. Consultant further submitted that even if the letters dated 9-4-1990 and 10-4-1990 are considered to be show cause notices, issued by the Collector for demanding the duty on the impugned goods the time-limit has to be computed from the dates of these two letters and the entire demands would be hit by time-limit of six months specified in Section 11A(1) of the Central Excise Act; that Collector himself in the impugned Order had held that the Departments being apprised of all the facts of the case, demand in excess of six months was not legally sustainable and neither any appe .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e Orders-in-Appeal was in view of the conclusion reached by the Collector (Appeals) that there was a lacuna in issuing the show cause notice dated 20-7-1988 and letter dated 29-3-1989 and as the same were not issued by the Collector, the defect could be corrected by placing those papers before the Jurisdictional Collector; that, therefore, the Collector (Appeals) directed in both the Orders to put up the papers to the Collector for such action as deemed fit by him; that accordingly Collector directed the appellants under letters dated 9-4-1990 and 10-4-1990 to file any additional submissions; that Collector also intimated under these two letters that the show cause notice and letter in question had been taken on record by him; that in view .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ct. He also relied upon the decision in the case of Gokak Patel Volkart Ltd. v. CCE - 1987 (28) E.L.T. 53 and in the case of U.O.I. v. Madhumilan Syntex Pvt. Ltd. - 1998 (35) E.L.T. 349 (S.C.). Finally he relied upon the decision in the case of Alcobex Metal Pvt. Ltd. v. CCE - 1992 (58) E.L.T. 108 (T) wherein it was held that once the show cause notice is found to be without jurisdiction the entire proceedings would also be without jurisdiction. 8. We have considered the submissions of both the sides. We find substantial force in the submissions of the ld. Consultant that once the Collector (Appeals) has found show cause notice and letter of demand without jurisdiction and set aside the both, nothing survives for the Collector to adjudica .....

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