9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (4) TMI 1317X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in the given facts and circumstances, is not in dispute, for it is the date on which the goods were cleared, i.e. date of clearance of goods/filing of monthly returns. Both events incidentally fall within the same month, which in the instant case, was February, 2008. It is also a matter of record that in July, 2009 itself, the assessee had apprised the department of revenue, by way of a declaration, as envisaged under the Act/Rules/ Regulations, indicating its intent of taking benefit of Notification dated 10.06.2003 - assessee had made evident its intent of availing the benefits under the Act, in accordance with law. Under identical circumstances, the Apex Court in case titled as Pushpam Pharmaceuticals Company Versus Collector of C ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t ), are as under:- (a) M/s. Deyam Industries, the assessee herein, is engaged in the business of manufacture of electrical goods. It has set up its Unit at Nalagarh, an industrial estate established by the Government of Himachal Pradesh, within the territorial limits of Himachal Pradesh. (b) The Unit came into production sometime in February, 2008. In July 2009 itself, the assessee, by means of a written declaration apprised the revenue of availing benefits in terms of, and under the Notification No. 50/2003-CE dated 10.06.2003, as amended from time to time. Pursuant thereto, the assessee started availing exemption from Central Excise Duty. This process continued till 19th April, 2011, when the revenue issued a show cause notice call ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... before it for the reason that action initiated by the revenue was beyond the period of limitation and no ground for invoking the extended period was made out by the revenue, making the case fall within the exceptions carved out for taking appropriate action, beyond the prescribed period of limitation. 5. For adjudication of the present appeal, we are concerned with the provisions of Section 11A of the Act, which we reproduce as under:- 11A. When any duty of excise has not been levied or paid or has been short-levied or short paid or erroneously refunded, whether or not such non-levy or nonpayment, short-levy or short payment or erroneous refund, as the case may be , was on the basis of any approval, acceptance or assessment relating ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... a matter of record that in July, 2009 itself, the assessee had apprised the department of revenue, by way of a declaration, as envisaged under the Act/Rules/ Regulations, indicating its intent of taking benefit of Notification dated 10.06.2003. 7. Thus far, it is clear that assessee had made evident its intent of availing the benefits under the Act, in accordance with law. 8. It is also not in dispute that only after the statutory period of one year having come to an end, but prior to five years, did the revenue initiate proceedings against the assessee with the issuance of show cause notice dated 19th of April, 2011. 9. The question which needs to be examined is as to whether it was open for the revenue/authorities to have done so ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
