1999 (10) TMI 469

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ber (T)]. In this appeal filed by the Revenue, the Order-in-Appeal, dated 22-2-1999 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Chandigarh is under challenge. The Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals) had observed that in the facts and circumstances of the case, no suppression or mis-statement had been established. 2. We have heard Shri S.K. Das, JDR for the appellants/Reven .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e assessee had mis-classified their products, we do not find any elaboration with regard to alleged suppression or mis- statement on their part. As submitted by the ld. SDR, the mis-classification was alleged as a result of some audit objection. 4. We find that the only allegation in justification of the invocation of the extended period of limitation is that the assessee had mis-classified the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X