9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (11) TMI 559X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he basis of very same challans - Tractors became exempt from payment of duty w.e.f. 9-7-2004, with the result that the goods manufactured by the appellant on job work basis were required to discharge duty liability – Held that:- Job worker cannot be expected to ascertain the fact of nature of final product being dutiable or exempted - principal filed declaration with their Jurisdictional Central E ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ensing with the condition of pre-deposit of duty of Rs. 1,17,452/- and penalty of identical amount, we proceed to decide the appeal as the issue lies in narrow campass. 2. The appellant is an ancillary unit of M/s. HMT (tractor division) engaged in the manufacture of various components and tractor on job work basis. The said job work was being done by the appellant in terms of Notification No. 2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... -2004 to 31-3-2005 and the appellant continued to avail the benefit of the said notification and kept clearing their goods to M/s. HMT without payment of duty. 4. Subsequently proceedings were initiated against the appellant by way of issuance of a show cause notice dated 24-9-2009 raising demand of duty for the said period on the ground that in as much as the goods manufactured by job worker th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed to remain and was not withdrawn. In such a scenario, no suppression or misstatement of facts with intent to evade duty can be attributed to the appellant so as to invoke the longer limitation period. 6. We find that there are number of ancillary units of M/s. HMT in or around that area. With the tractors becoming exempt w.e.f. 9-7-04, M/s. HMT, continued to send the raw materials under job wo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aring the raw material under job work challan, is sufficient for the job worker to entertain a reasonable belief that the goods being manufactured on job work basis are being used by the principal in the manufacture of dutiable products. Failure on the part of M/s. HMT cannot be taken as a ground to reflect on the mala fide on the part of job worker i.e. the appellant. Accordingly, we hold that th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
