2004 (1) TMI 419

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ndents were working under SSI exemption scheme. Towards the end of the financial year 1996-97, their aggregate value of clearances of specified goods crossed the limit of Rs. 30 lakhs beyond which they were liable to pay duty of excise on the goods at concessional rates in terms of the exemption notification. But it was only at the stage of scrutiny of their Sales Tax Returns for the said financia .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... o set aside the order of the lower authority. Hence the present appeal of the Revenue. 2. In this appeal, the appellant challenges the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) in relation to both duty and penalty. The appellant has relied on the Tribunal s Larger Bench decision in Nizam Sugar Factory v. CCE, [1999 (114) E.L.T. 429] to contend that the larger period of limitation was rightly invoked i .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... of no suppression is conclusive and beyond challenge by the Revenue, the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) holding that the extended period of limitation is not invocable in this case has to be affirmed inasmuch as the extended period was invoked only on the ground of suppression. Nevertheless, as fairly submitted by ld. Counsel, the respondents had expressed their willingness to pay the duty .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X