9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (1) TMI 64X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ntral Excise duty. They are in the business of manufacture of tractors since 1959. The issue in present appeals relate to the period 1.1.1996 to 31.5.1998 involving the duty liability on transmission assembly manufactured and consumed by the appellants. The proceedings initiated against the appellants resulted into Order-in-Original dated 28.1.2005 wherein the original authority confirmed the demand of Rs. 25,83,44,804/- and imposed equal penalty on the appellants. Penalties were also imposed on other two appellants who were employees of the main appellants. Aggrieved by the original order, the present appeals have been filed. 3. Learned Counsel for the appellant Shri B.L.Narasimhan during the arguments concedes that the issue on merits ha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... started sending transmission assembly to their unit in Bhopal. In November, 2000, Central Excise officers visited their factory and consequently a show cause notice was issued on 29.1.2001 for demanding duty on transmission assembly for the period 1.1.1996 to 31.5.1998. 4. Learned Counsel strongly contested that the whole matter of marketability and thereupon dutiability of transmission assembly was subject matter of dispute and all the four major manufacturers of tractors in India had issue with the department. In fact in a similar matter, central excise authority held transmission assembly was neither manufactured item nor a marketable product in respect of TAPE. The said decision of the original authority was upheld by the Tribunal vide ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on assembly has been settled on merits by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Escorts Ltd. (supra). Hence, there is no examination of merits in the present case of the appellants. However, we find that the appellants have strong case on the question of time bar. The chorological of events as explained by the learned counsel for the appellant indicate that the appellants have been informing the department at various stages regarding various types of items manufactured and consumed/cleared by them and also the introduction of single assembly line with effect from March, 1994. We find that on similar set of facts, Hon'ble Supreme Court held that there is no case for invoking extended period for demand. It is also admitted fact that different ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at single assembly line had eliminated the emergence of various intermediate products for separate accounting and listing, and integrated assembly line is a continuous seamless process finally resulted in the manufacture of tractors. As such it is not sustainable to allege suppression of facts or wilful mis-statement on the part of the appellants with reference to non payment of central excise duty on transmission assembly manufactured and consumed by them. The whole marketability and taxability was settled, only by the Apex Court as stated above, much later. We also find that the Tribunal vide final order No.51710/2015 dated 26.05.2015 in the case of Punjab Tractors Ltd. has held that there is no case for fraud or wilful mis-statement in a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
