9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (12) TMI 847X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... til the evasion was discovered, it was not possible for the Revenue to proceed - extended period of limitation - substantial questions of law. Held that: - The Tribunal found and as a matter of fact that whatever may be the procedure adopted and if it contravenes the law, the Department should have taken prompt action. The Department though in the know of things on 1462004, allowed the assessee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... icability of Section 11A and invocation of the extended period thereunder. The extended period could not have been invoked in the absence of the requisite ingredients and to be found in Clauses (a) to (e) of subsection (4) of Section 11A of the Central Excise Act, 1944. This is clearly a finding of fact and reached in the backdrop of the assessee's peculiar case. We do not think that such findings ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l rate of duty in terms of serial No.3 of Notification No.23/2003Central Excise, dated 3132003. These are substantial questions of law, according to Mr. Bangur, for the show cause notice was issued on 372009, within a period of five years. The assessee was working under a scheme of selfremoval procedure and it was for them to have availed of the Notification if that was applicable. In the present ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2009 covering a period April, 2004 to March, 2006 was barred. 4. These very facts were, therefore, appreciated by the Tribunal and in arriving at the conclusion that the show cause notice and the proceedings in pursuance thereof were barred by limitation. It may be that the Tribunal dealt with an incidental contention of the Revenue. Merely because that incidental question has been dealt with, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
