2014 (10) TMI 124

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Sweta Bector, DR JUDGEMENT Per: Archana Wadhwa: After hearing both sides, we find that a dispute arise between the appellant and its jurisdictional Central Excise authorities about the correct classification of the appellants product which was various types of tea. Whereas the appellant was claiming the classification of the same under chapter heading 0902.00, Revenue was of the view that the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Accordingly, penalty was set aside and the matter was remanded to the original adjudicating authority for quantification of the consequent demand falling with the limitation period. 3. The adjudicating authority in remand proceedings calculated the assessed liability alongwith confirmation of interest. The appellant deposited the differential duty but being aggrieved with the confirmation of inte .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... uty on account of reason of fraud, collusion or any wilful mis-statement or suppression of facts. The Tribunal, while remanding the matter has already held that there is no suppression or any malafide on the part of the assessee and has extended the benefit of limitation as also penalty to the assessee. In such a scenario the provision of Section 11AB, as were in existence during the relevant peri .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X