9911796707
TMI Blog2008 (8) TMI 767X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ocate, for the Appellant. Shri Sameer Chitkara, SDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : Archana Wadhwa, Member (J)]. - After hearing both sides, we find that the duty has been confirmed against the appellant along with imposition of penalty by classifying the appellant s product i.e. Coated Calcite under Heading 3824.90 as against appellant s claim of classification under sub-heading 25.05, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... located at Sion as also at Sewri, where they are manufacturing the same product i.e. Coated Calcite. Both the said units have filed classification list before their jurisdictional Central Excise authorities, claiming classification of the said product under Heading 25, which classification list was duly approved by the proper officer. They also drew our attention to the various other classificatio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dopted by other units will not curtail down period of limitation to normal period. 4. By drawing our attention to various decisions of Hon ble Supreme Court, it stand contended, before us that for invoking longer period of limitation, there needs to be positive withholding of some information by the assessee or positive suppression on behalf of the assessee. Hon ble Supreme Court in case of M/s. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e, we find that the appellant s own unit located at two different places have filed classification list with their jurisdictional Central Excise Authorities claiming classification of the product under Chapter 25 which stand duly approved by the officers. This fact by itself was sufficient for the appellant to entertain a bona fide belief that the product in question is classifiable under Cha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... -price would also be extended to the appellant at the time of re-quantification of the demand. 7. As we have already held in favour of appellant on the issue of bona fide belief, we do not find it to be a fit case for imposition of penalty. The same is, accordingly, set aside. 8. Appeal is disposed off in above terms. (Dictated and pronounced in court) - - TaxTMI - TMITax - Central ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
