9911796707
TMI Blog2004 (6) TMI 386X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Without accounting the same in statutory records covered by Central Excise Invoices on and after determining duty payable. The notice was based on the allegation of suppression of manufacturing process of framed glass mirrors in as much as they did not disclose to the department that they were getting plastic frame and back cover manufactured out of plastic moulding powder from job workers and framed the mirror cut from full mirror sheet had deliberately declared the said goods in Part III of the classification List/Declaration as non-excisable leading the department to believe that what they did, was trading activity in receiving duty paid mirrors and selling the same. 2. The lower authorities confirmed the demand and imposed pe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y taking the department into believing that what they did was only a trading activity like receiving duty paid mirror and selling the same thereafter whereas in fact they used to get the plastic frame manufactured on job work and then fitting the mirror on frames time and they are fully aware of the Central Excise Rules and procedures. Still knowing fully well the implications, they failed to mention the framed glass mirror manufactured by them in Pt. II as excisable goods and put the same deliberately in Pt. III meant for declaring the non-excisable goods. Further, they had also not taken permission or given intimation to the department that they were sending the raw-materials i.e. moulding powder to job worker for manufacturing frames a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ls) holding their framing of duty paid glass mirrors did not amount to manufacture filed classification List No. 4/90-91 w.e.f. 28-11-90 which was duly approved on 15-1-92 classification list were accordingly filed in the years 1994-95 1995-96. (ii) During 31-10-91 to 24-2-92 the Range Superintendent had issued notice proposing classification under Heading of 94.03 and demanded duty the matters was heard by the Assistant Commissioner on 28-9-94 vide F No. V(Adj) (39) 4-93/92 no decision was announced. Period covered was 11-1-91 to 30-9-91. (iii) The Additional Commissioner of Central Excise adjudication a SCN dt. 1-8-95 demanding duty for the period 1-7-90 to 31-8-93 under Heading 94.03. Who under order dt. 28-4-97 droppe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... no permission was taken for sending the moulding powder plaster to job worker for moulding the frames. This would amount to suppression can not be upheld when the assessee was and had reasons to believe that framing of glass mirrors did not amount to manufacture the classification lists filed as for back bench as 4/1990-1991, on that basis was approved as not amounting to manufacture. (c) Since the appellants are found to be having a case in their favour on the grounds of bar of limitation on the duty demands made for the alleged evasion during the period March 94 to October 95 by, notice dt. 2-7-98 the demands of duty cannot be upheld. Consequently the orders on Section 11AC penalty enlist do not survive. 4. In view of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
