9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (12) TMI 278X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2. According to the appellant, such job charges for various types of fabrics were being finalized by the principal-manufacturer and there were certain variations at the last moment. Such variations in job charges was sometimes not taken into account by the appellant and the duty was paid on the basis of the job charges originally agreed between the appellant and the original manufacturer. This resulted in payment of duty in excess, in some of the cases, where the job charges were subsequently reduced and in short-payment of duty, where the job charges were subsequently enhanced. 3. The appellant's factory was visited by the Central Excise officers on 30th April 2002, who conducted various checks and verifications. The incidents ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uct. 5. While dealing with the above submissions of the appellant, the Adjudicating Authority observed that every assessment is an independent assessment and where the Revenue has raised the demand of duty based upon short-payment of duty by adopting lower assessable value, the said demand cannot be adjusted against the excess paid duty. If the appellant is aggrieved with the excess payment of duty, they are within their rights to file a refund claim. As regards, availability of deemed credit notification, he observed that the same should have been availed at the time of original clearance of the goods. 6. As regards the adjustment of the excess paid duty with the short-paid duty, learned advocate fairly agrees that the issue st ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... efit of the notification, in question, is available to the appellant. 8. As regards the limitation, though learned advocate has fairly submitted that the same was not raised before the Adjudicating Authority but keeping in view that the same is a mixed question of fact and law, we proceed to decide on the said issue. Inasmuch as no conflicting facts are involved, we do not deem it fit to remand the matter on the point of limitation and proceed to decide the same ourselves. The period for which the demand stand confirmed is from March 2001 to 30th April 2002 and the show cause notice stands issued on 3rd February 2003 i.e. beyond the limitation period. The fact of short-payment of duty was detected by the visiting officers on 30th Apri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
