9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (11) TMI 514X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 5 which was prepared in October/November after closure of financial year. We do not find any material on record that the Department had initiated any enquiry for getting the figures despite their knowledge of non-inclusion of the value in the finished goods. All the facts are within the knowledge of the Department, when first show cause notice was issued on 25.07.2004. So the demand of duty for ex ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aken up together for disposal. 2. The Appellants were engaged in the manufacture of C.I. Castings and S.G.I. Castings, classifiable under Chapter 73 of the Schedule to Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. They purchased Moulds and Dyes, in accordance with the specific design, drawings and dimensions of the goods as required by buyers. The Appellant collected the cost of the moulds and dyes from the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... al issue by show cause notice dt.25.07.2004, demand was raised for the period 2001 to 2004. The Tribunal by Final Order No.A/1244/WZB/AHD/2011, dt.22.06.2011 remanded the matter for quantification of demand of duty. It is submitted that the Department was aware of the fact as evident from the earlier Show Cause Notice dt.25.07.2004 and therefore, the extended period of limitation cannot be invoked ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ces and the plea of the Appellant that that the figures of demand/data having been picked up by the Revenue from the balance sheet, which is a public document, no malafide can be attributed to the Appellant. In the present case, the Commissioner (Appeals) observed that balance sheet for the year 2004-05 could not have been available on 25.07.2005 which was prepared in October/November after closur ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l period by Show Cause Notice dt.26.09.2006 is liable to be upheld. But it is required to examine the quantification of demand by the lower authorities as per earlier order dt.22.06.2011 of the Tribunal. 7. In view of the above discussion, we set aside the impugned order in Appeal No.E/1181/2007 and the appeal is allowed with consequential relief. In Appeal No.E/1182/2007, the demand of duty al ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
