9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (12) TMI 697X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... m this date. SCN hit by time limitation - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - E/878/2007 - A/31860/2017 - Dated:- 14-11-2017 - Mr. M.V. Ravindran, Member (Judicial) And Mr. Madhu Mohan Damodhar, Member(Technical) Ms. ASK Swetha, Advocate for the Appellant. Smt. B.V. Siva Naga Kumari, Commissioner/ (AR) for the Respondent. ORDER [Order per: M.V. Ravindran] 1. This appeal is directed against Order-in-Appeal No:128/2007 (V-I) CE, dated 08.10.2007. 2. Heard both sides and perused records. 3. On perusal of records, it transpires that the issue is regarding demand of differential Central Excise duty from the appellant for the period 1993-94 on the ground that appellant had undervalued the good ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed under Rule 174 A of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. I find that the appellant is not a registered unit and hence not required to file any return. Therefore, the only instance when the department would know about the details of turnover etc. is when they file the annual declaration under Rule 174A. Therefore, the annual declaration filed by the appellant under Rule 174A shall be treated on par with periodical return prescribed under Central Excise Rules, 1944. Therefore, I find that the six months time limit prescribed under Section 11A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 shall be applicable from the date of filing of the annual declaration under Rule 174A of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. I find that the show cause notice was issued on 13 t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 94 for demanding the duty liability for the period 1993-94, seems to be hit by limitation, as the declaration filed by the appellant includes the details of the valuation of goods cleared from the factory premises. 6. Ld. Commissioner (AR) submission that limitation should be considered from 15.04.1994, on the last date of the filing for declaration, an argument which may not carry the case of the revenue any further, on the fact of the matter that undisputedly appellant had filed declaration on 13.04.1994, hence question of limitation needs to be reckoned from this date. 7. In view of the foregoing, we hold that the demand which has been raised by show cause notice dated 13.10.1994 is hit by limitation. Accordingly, the impugned orde ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
