9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (6) TMI 865X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... said goods. Extended period of limitation - Held that:- When there were doubts in the field as well as even in the minds of the departmental officers whether such goods will be covered within the entry in the notification, the allegation of suppression made against the appellant cannot be sustained - invoking the extended time limit under Section 11A is to be set aside and demand restricted to that falling within the normal time limit. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - Ex. Appeal No. 58168 of 2013 - A/52004/2018-EX[DB] - Dated:- 21-5-2018 - Mr. V. Padmanabhan, Member (Technical) And Ms. Rachna Gupta, Member (Judicial) Sh. B. L. Narasimhan, Advocate for the appellant Sh. R. K. Mishra, AR for the Responde ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... also held that the ball bearings sold by the appellant will be covered within the description of parts, components and assembly of automobiles falling under the above notification. He also imposed penalty under Section 11AC of the Act. Aggrieved by the decision, the present appeal is filed by the appellant. 3. With the above background, we heard Sh. B. L. Narasimhan, ld. Advocate for the appellant and Sh. R. K. Mishra, ld. AR for the Revenue. 4. The case of the appellant as argued by the ld. Advocate is summarised below: (i) Dispute is pertaining to the ball bearings manufactured for the automobile industry. He submitted that the issue whether ball bearings will be covered within the description of parts, components and assembl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... justified the impugned order. He submitted that appellant have manufactured and cleared ball bearings which are definitely parts of automobiles and hence the entry in the notification is applicable. Since the circular has clarified the issue, the levy under section 4A may kindly be upheld. 6. After hearing both sides and perusal of record, we find that the dispute is pertaining to ball bearings manufactured and cleared by the appellant which are designed as parts of automobiles. Such goods have been cleared by the appellant for the replacement market. The Department has taken the view that such ball bearings are covered by the entry in the notification parts, components and assemblies of automobiles . It is seen that the issue whether ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... under Section 4A on the said goods. We notice that the demand for Central Excise duty have been made by invoking the suppression clause for the period of five years. The facts of the present case, when there were doubts in the field as well as even in the minds of the departmental officers whether such goods will be covered within the entry in the notification, we are of the view that the allegation of suppression made against the appellant cannot be sustained. Hence, we are of the view that invoking the extended time limit under Section 11A is to be set aside and demand restricted to that falling within the normal time limit. The Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Suchitra Components Ltd. (supra) has categorically held that beneficia ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
