9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (10) TMI 678X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ope of the show cause notice and the demands to the normal period. The logic which persuaded the Tribunal to hold as it did was that at that time, the assessee could reasonably contend that there was a view which supported its declaration. In other words, during the period which was sought to be covered by the show cause notice, the Larger Bench ruling in Prakash Industries (2000 (5) TMI 59 - CEGA ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... - Dated:- 16-5-2014 - Mr. S. Ravindra Bhat and Mr. Vibhu Bakhru, JJ. For the Petitioner : Mr. Rahul Kaushik, Advocate. For the Respondent : None. ORDER The Revenue claims to be aggrieved by an order of the Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) dated 22.08.2013 to the extent that its contentions with respect to the applicability of the extended period ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Tribunal, the latter noticed that in view of the previous law declared by a Larger Bench in Prakash Industries v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Bhubaneswar 2000 (119) ELT 30 and subsequently followed in Kohinoor Elastics (P) Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Indore-II, 2001 (136) ELT 1155, the charge of fraud, etc. in claiming exemption for the limited purpose of invoking the extended per ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and the demands to the normal period. The logic which persuaded the Tribunal to hold as it did was that at that time, the assessee could reasonably contend that there was a view which supported its declaration. In other words, during the period which was sought to be covered by the show cause notice, the Larger Bench ruling in Prakash Industries (supra) was in force. As far as the merits were conc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
