9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (5) TMI 1341X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... harma, Consultant PER: ASHOK JINDAL The Revenue is in appeal against the impugned order. 2. The brief facts of the case are that an enquiry against M/s. Vasantham Enterprises, Barotiwala, vendor of M/s. of Hindustan Unilver Limited regarding wrong availment of benefit of area based exemption under Notification No.50/2003-CE dated 10.6.2003, by non payment of Central Excise duty on their finishe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r option for exemption from Central Excise duty with the Department during the month of April, 2009, to avail the benefit of area based exemption without furnishing any document to that effect. After completing enquiry, it was alleged that the respondent was not a mere labour contractor but an independent manufacturer of the excisable goods in terms of section 2(f) ((iii) of Central Excise Act,194 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ntral Excise Act, as such, they were liable to pay duty at the time of clearance of these goods from their factory. It was also proposed that as the respondent has not complied with condition of Notification strictly, therefore, they are not entitled for the benefit of the exemption Notification. 3. Heard the parties. 4. Considering the fact that similar situated M/s. Vasantham Enterprises vs. C ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , we hold in this case that the show cause notice has been issued on 8.12.2010 by invoking the extended period of limitation for the period June, 2007 to April, 2009 whereas the appellant was paying service tax to the department for their activity. In that circumstance, the extended period of limitation is not invokable. Moreover, the respondent has filed declaration to the department on 20.4.2009 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
