9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (3) TMI 1122X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e was no malafide or suppression on the part of the assessee. Inasmuch as the limitation aspect already stand decided by the Tribunal, which order of the Tribunal was accepted by the department and no appeal was filed their against, Revenue cannot held to be aggrieved with the impugned order of Commissioner (Appeals) granting limitation benefit - appeal dismissed - decided against Revenue. - Appe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ause notice dt. 25.3.1999 was issued to them demanding duty of ₹ 19,28,364/- for the period 28.9.1996 to 31.12.1998, along with confirmation of interest and imposition of penalty. Another notice was issued for 1.1.1999 to 31.1.1999 proposing confirmation of demand of duty of ₹ 40,821.41. 3. Both the notices culminated into an order by the Additional Commissioner confirming the deman ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tor In-charge of the Range from 13.12.1996. They copy of the same also submitted to the Additional commissioner on 07.02.2008. Further, the appellant has submitted copy of the printed price lists which were meant for the C F agents and as such the appellant has not suppressed any information on this grounds alone. (b) The appellant has filed RT-12 return with the Central Excise jurisdictiona ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nvoices so as to verify the correctness within 3 months of the receipt of RT-12 returns and to submit a certificate to this effect to the Divisional Assistant Commissioner alongwith the statement of RT-12 returns scrutinized, especially with regard the six aspects mentioned therein. It was further observed in the said order of Tribunal: (d) 3.1 Since the issue of limitation and the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the assessee. Inasmuch as the limitation aspect already stand decided by the Tribunal, which order of the Tribunal was accepted by the department and no appeal was filed their against, Revenue cannot held to be aggrieved with the impugned order of Commissioner (Appeals) granting limitation benefit. Accordingly, we find no justifiable reasons to interfere in the impugned order of Commissione ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
