9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (7) TMI 16X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . Carlos, for the Appellant. Shri Jitendra Motwani with Chirag Shetty i/b. M/s. Economic Laws Practice, for the Respondent. ORDER The Revenue is in appeal against the order of the Tribunal dated 18th March, 2015 [2015 (329) E.L.T. 841 (Tri.-Ahmd.)]. The Tribunal had before it the Revenue s appeal challenging the order of the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals) dated 18th March, 2015. The Commissioner (Appeals) had set aside the order-in-original only on the point of limitation. The argument before the Commissioner (Appeals) was that the assessee was engaged in the manufacture of electric wires and cables for industrial purpose classifiable under Chapter 85.44 of the First Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l, we are unable to agree. The Tribunal must perform its duty as a last fact finding authority is indeed an unassailable legal proposition. However, it has performed it or otherwise would depend on the facts and circumstances of each case and we must find out whether in this case the Tribunal has failed in its duty expected from it to be performed in law. It is not fair to read only one paragraph of the order under appeal or by picking out some sentences therefrom. To read the order in appeal in such a manner and consider the finding in isolation would be unjust and unfair. The Commissioner (Appeals) in this case held that the assessee was expected to perform certain duty and that is of full disclosure of facts. In the present case, the ass ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... v. Collector of Customs and Central Excise - 1998 (101) E.L.T. 549 (S.C.). The Tribunal relied upon it because the principle enshrined therein had application to the case at hand. Meaning thereby, it did not blindly follow this principle. The principle is, when all the facts necessary to be disclosed by the assessee have been disclosed and there cannot be any allegation of suppression, then, the extended period of limitation cannot be invoked. On facts, it found no suppression in this case. That is what the Commissioner (Appeals) also found. It is, therefore, the endorsement of the Commissioner s finding and conclusion. 6. We do not find any perversity in these concurrent orders. There is no error of law apparent on the face of the recor ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
