9911796707
TMI Blog2010 (8) TMI 306X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y provision. It is not the case of the Department that the respondent committed fraud or there was collusion. Their case is that there is misstatement and suppression of facts. If that be so, the factum of intention to evade payment must be clearly proved. It is admitted by the Department that the show cause notice was issued by the Assistant Commissioner on 13-3-2003, which was confirmed on 30-11 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ners" falling under Chapter Sub-Heading No. 84.09 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. They have their trading division at Vijayawada for distributing their products. During the period from 1-8-1996 to 18-11-1998 the respondent removed the final product from their factory to the trading division on payment of central excise duty by raising invoices, but they did not pay any sales tax while clea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... partment then appealed to the Commissioner of Central Excise and Customs (Appeals), which was dismissed vide order dated 22-5-2008. The appeal to CESTAT was also dismissed by the impugned order.' 3. Standing Counsel for Central Excise and Customs submits that, when there is short payment of duty of excisable goods, the assessee is liable to pay the penalty and interest and, therefore, CESTAT was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ession of facts, or contravention of any of the provisions of this Act or of the rules made thereunder with intent to evade payment of duty, the person who is liable to pay duty as determined under sub-section (2) of Section 11A, shall also be liable to pay a penalty equal to the duty so determined. 4. A plain reading of the above would show that willful misstatement or suppression of facts with ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
