2016 (11) TMI 402

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... t was very much known to the Department, therefore there is no suppression of fact on the part of the appellant. The appellant also bonafidely intimated to the Department about the manufacture of such goods. This also shows bonafide of the appellant. There is no suppression of fact or mis-declaration with intent to evade payment of duty on the part of the appellant, therefore the demand of the duty for more than one year is not sustainable. For the same reason, penalty under Section 11AC also not imposable. As per above discussion, we set aside the demand for a period more than one year from the date of show-cause notice and penalty imposed under Section 11AC is also set aside. The appeal is partly allowed in the above terms. The adjudi .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ication. In the present case the show-cause notice was issued for the subsequent period, therefore the show-cause notice neither could be issued invoking extended period nor could be alleged the suppression of fact as provided under proviso to Section 11A. He submits that the appellant through their letter dated 24.06.2002, intimated the Range Superintendent about their intention to manufacture the aforesaid products, claiming classification thereof under S.H.No. 0903.10 attracting Nil rate of duty. The labels of these products also were submitted along with the said letter. In this fact there is no suppression of fact on part of the appellant. It is a settled law that on the issue of classification, demand for the subsequent period cannot .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e manufacture of such goods. This also shows bonafide of the appellant. In view of the above discussion of undisputed fact, we hold that there is no suppression of fact or mis-declaration with intent to evade payment of duty on the part of the appellant, therefore the demand of the duty for more than one year is not sustainable. For the same reason, penalty under Section 11AC also not imposable. As per above discussion, we set aside the demand for a period more than one year from the date of show-cause notice and penalty imposed under Section 11AC is also set aside. The appeal is partly allowed in the above terms. The adjudicating authority is directed to re-quantify the duty as per the above order and recover the same, if any due from the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X