2008 (2) TMI 41

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... t manufacturers who was supplying fabrics to him – so assessee is not a party to mis-declaration - there is no legal requirement for processors to verify the correctness of declaration furnished by owners, extended period of limitation is not applicable - 2516 of 2002 - - - Dated:- 19-2-2008 - Ashok Bhan and J.M. Panchal, JJ. [Order].- Respondent-assessee, hereinafter referred to as the ' .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ification lists were approved by the Assistant Collector, Central Excise believing that the statement of the assessee given in the classification lists was true and correct. 3. Samples were collected from the assessee-company and they were got chemically tested which indicated that they were having polyster above 70% and thus would attract higher rate of duty and the assessee company had mis .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 6. The adjudicating authority held that "it is presumed that assessee is also a party to the mis-declaration in respect of the composition of the fabrics" and confirmed the demand of Rs.14,80,269.75 on the assessee and imposed a penalty of Rs.1 lakh on the assessee. He also imposed a penalty of Rs.5,000/- each on the merchant manufacturers. Appeal filed by the assessee before the Commission .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X