2012 (8) TMI 346

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... al against the impugned order confirming the demand of duty for the period 1.4.1993 to 31.3.1998 of Rs.1,10,91,973/- along with interest and various penalties imposed under the Central Excise Act, 1944 and Rules thereunder.   2. The facts of the case are that the appellants are manufacturers of shikakai powder and not discharging duty on the premise that it is a vegetable product and more ov .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... dispute about the classification of the product, therefore demand for the extended period of limitation is not sustainable.   4. Heard the learned counsel and considered the submissions. As the issue involved is more than of classification of shikakai powder, which was held against the appellants in 2009, therefore, demand for the extended period of limitation is not sustainable but demand f .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X