9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (9) TMI 356X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , Dibrugarh asking it to pay a sum of Rs.9,36,110/- towards the excise duty payable and also intimating it that in the event of failure to pay the said amount within 7 (seven) days from the date of service of notice, the required steps for realization of the said amount would be taken under the provisions of the Customs (Attachment of Property of Defaulters of Recovery of Government Dues) Rules, 1995. The grounds on which the said notice issued by the Assistant Commissioner is put under challenge are that - (i) the assessment of the duty payable under the provisions of the Act having been made on 17th January, 2011, such notice of demand cannot be issued after expiry of 1 (one) year from the date of making such assessment, as has been done ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... al being contrary to the provisions of Section 11-A(1) of the Act and as such, on the basis of such demand notice, the Assistant Commissioner cannot issue the certificate of demand dated 31st August, 2006 and the impugned notice dated 22nd January, 2008. It has also been submitted by Mr. Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner that in any case, the cause of action for recovery of the duty payable by the petitioner having been arose on 17th January, 2007, i.e. the date when the assessment was made by the competent authority, no recovery proceeding can be initiated and the petitioner cannot be asked to pay the amount under the provisions of the Act, in view of the period of limitation of 3 (three) years prescribed under the 1963 Act. Mr. S ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er having failed to deposit the said amount, the certificate of demand was issued by the jurisdictional Deputy Commissioner, Jorhat on 31st August, 2006, which was sent to the Assistant Commissioner, Central Excise, who is the Designated Recovery Officer, Dibrugarh to take required steps for recovery of such duty from the petitioner and consequently the impugned notice dated 22nd January, 2008 was issued by the Assistant Commissioner, Central Excise, Dibrugarh. It has also been submitted by Mr. Bhagabati that the provisions of the 1963 Act is not applicable to the proceeding under the Excise Act, as the provisions of the Limitation Act is applicable in suit or other proceeding initiated in the suit or the appeal or revision arising out of s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Section 11-A of the Act provides the period of 1 (one) year, for the purpose of issuance of the show cause notice, from the relevant date, where any duty of excise has not been levied or paid or has been short levied or short paid or erroneously refunded, whether or not such non levy or non-payment, short levy or short payment or erroneous refund, as the case may be, was on the basis of any approval, acceptance or any other provisions of the Act or the Rules made thereunder. Such period of 1 (one) year is not for the purpose of issuance of notice of demand, as contended by the petitioner. Sub-Section (2) of Section 11-A of the Act requires the Central Excise Officer to determine the amount of duty of excise due from such person upon consid ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
