9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (10) TMI 1799X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he days inclusive) is concerned, there is no ambiguity in this regard. Duty was imposed vide Notification No. 5/98-C.E., dated 2-6-1998 and it was withdrawn only on 18-7-1998. Therefore, during the intervening period, duty was obviously leviable. However I take note of the fact that this levy was introduced for the first time and it indeed caused protests of a magnitude that the Minister of Financ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... K. Dhawan, DR, for the Respondent. ORDER Appeal has been filed against the Order-in-Original No. 116/2003, dated 27-11-2003. The short point involved in this case is whether the product namely various namkeens were liable to duty during the period 2-6-1998 to 17-7-1998 (46 days). Learned advocate contends that the levy was introduced for the first time vide Notification No. 5/98-C.E., d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d is not time barred. 4. I have considered the submissions of both sides. As far as the leviability of duty on the impugned goods during the period 2-6-1998 to 17-7-1998 (both the days inclusive) is concerned, there is no ambiguity in this regard. Duty was imposed vide Notification No. 5/98-C.E., dated 2-6-1998 and it was withdrawn only on 18-7-1998. Therefore, during the intervening period, du ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... group companies M/s. Sunshine Food Products and Shivdeep Food Products Pvt. Ltd., in cases involving identical issue/grounds the Commissioner (Appeals) held that the extended period was not invokable for similar reasons and those orders in appeal have not been appealed against by Revenue. However, it is not necessary to draw support from the said orders in appeal because the circumstances as narr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
