9911796707
TMI Blog2008 (1) TMI 783X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eared on behalf of the appellants. By letter dated 16-11-2007, the appellants requested to decide the appeal on merit in their absence. 2. The relevant facts of the case, in brief, are that the appellants cleared two machines under Invoices dated 13-6-2000 and 4-2-2002 without paying duty. It was detected by the Central Excise Audit Party and the appellants paid duty on 30-1-2003 against the inv ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... It is further contended that the goods were cleared under Invoice dated 13-6-2000 and 4-2-2002 and, therefore, demand of duty is barred by limitation. 4. Ld. D.R. on behalf of the Revenue reiterates the findings of the Commissioner (Appeals). He submits that the appellants had not disputed the payment of duty on merits. He further submits that the appellants deposited the duty voluntarily in ord ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Central Excise Rules, 1944. In this context, the ld. DR submits that the goods were cleared on 3-1-2002 and 4-2-2002 when Rule 57S was not in force. The relevant portion of the adjudication order is reproduced below :- 17. It is noticed that the relevant provisions which covered the aspect of chargeability of duty on clearance of the capital goods on which credit was taken were Rule 57AB(1) of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lant deposited the duty without any protest and, therefore, there is no requirement of issue of show cause notice under Section 11A of the Act. There is no violation of principles of natural justice. It is seen that the payment of duty is legal and proper. Therefore, I do not find any reason to interfere the order of the Commissioner (Appeals). Accordingly, the appeal is rejected. (Order dictate ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
