9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (1) TMI 234X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... -EX[DB] - Dated:- 15-10-2018 - MR. C.L. MAHAR, MEMBER (TECHNICAL) And MRS. RACHNA GUPTA, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) Present for the Appellant: Mr. Amit Jain, Advocate Present for the Respondent: Mr. R.K. Mishra, DR ORDER PER: RACHNA GUPTA Present Order deals with the 4 (four) Appeals with the following details: Appeals No. E/52286/2016 E/50094/2016 E/52128/2015 E/53164/2015 Impugned O-I-O No. 22/2015-16 dated 18.03.16 12/2015-16 dated 26.10.15 24-25/2014-15 dated 25.02.15 29-33/2014-15 dated 25.03.15 SCNs dated ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that the appellants are engaged in manufacture and in clandestine removal of the aforementioned goods which were excisable. A search was conducted by the officers of anti evasion of Central Excise Commissionerate in the premises of the appellant on 10.10.2003. It is thereafter that the Show Cause Notices as mentioned above were served upon the appellant for the respective period and the respective demand. Those demands have partly been confirmed. The major part of the said demand has been dropped vide the respective order as already mentioned above. Being aggrieved of the demand confirmed, the Appeals in hand have been filed. 3. We have heard Mr. Amit Jain, Ld. Advocate for the appellant and Mr. R.K. Mishra, Ld. DR for the Department. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gned SCN as being barred by time for want of any evidence for alleged intent of tax evasion. 6. Ld. DR though has conceded for the admissibility of the Appeal before the Hon ble Apex Court and that no outcome as yet. But has impressed upon that the impugned goods are otherwise excisable and the activity of the appellant amounts to manufacture. It is also impressed upon that two out of four of these appeals are the subject matter of appeal before Hon ble Apex Court, hence are no more maintainable. 7. After hearing both the parties, we are of the opinion that the controversy in all these Appeals is common as to whether the impugned activity of the appellant amounts to manufacture and as to whether the products so processed fall under Ch ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and Desktop clocks under Chapter 9102. Being aggrieved of confirmation of entire demand, Civil Appeal No.9478-9479/2010 was preferred before Hon ble Supreme Court (as conceded by both the parties). 10. It is also observed that the appeals which were decided by O-I-O dated 28.04.2005 and went to Hon ble Supreme Court are Appeal Nos. E/52286/2016 and E/50094/2016. However, in compliance, with the directions of the CESTAT Order dated 13.08.2010, the appellant provided requisite data for the period 1998 to December, 2003 to the Department vide their leter dated 05.06.2015 relating to value and duty thereof on divinity products and clocks. Detailed submissions including about invocation of extended period of limitation, availability of cenva ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
