9911796707
TMI Blog2009 (2) TMI 169X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t - no investigation by the Central Excise authorities have been made or even if made no evidence to substantiate the allegation of deliberate suppression of relevant facts has been relied upon – there was no deliberate attempt on the part of the respondent in not revealing the fact that Thane unit was not availing exemption meant for small scale unit, though the said fact may be relevant to determine the eligibility of exemption for the present unit – demand beyond normal period of limitation not maintainable. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ch of those units have not been correctly declared and that the Thane unit was not availing the benefit of exemption under Notification No. 1/1993 and, therefore, the Pithampur unit was not eligible for exemption. (e) The original authority confirmed the demand of Rs. 5,06,065.65 for the year 1994-95 and Rs. 6,06,050.46 for the year 1995-96 and imposed penalty of Rs. 25,000/- on the company and Rs. 10,000/- on the Factory Manager. (f) Commissioner (Appeals) allowed the appeals on the ground that the demand is time-barred. 4. Learned DR submits that the exemption is available to a manufacturer and all the three units belong to the same manufacturer; the respondent had obligation to declare the existence of all the three units and their cl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ane unit was not availing the exemption and hence proposing enhancement of the duty demand which was not accepted by the Commissioner (Appeals). 6.1 We have carefully considered the submissions from both sides. We find that the alleged mistake of not disclosing the existence of three units of the respondent was not detected by the Department. The entire facts have been brought to the notice of the Department only by the respondent first vide their letter dated 23-1-1996 addressed to the Burhanpur unit wherein they have made the following submissions:- "We have further to inform your kind honour that when the Excise Duty started being levied on our Thane and Burhanpur unit w.e.f. 1-4-94 we were misguided that we need not to declare other u ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t. 7. The same details have been furnished in respect of the present unit vide their letter dated 2-2-1996. We find that no investigation by the Central Excise authorities have been made or even if made no evidence to substantiate the allegation of deliberate suppression of relevant facts has been relied upon. Further, in the grounds of appeal it has been stated that "although they had declared the existence of Thane and Burhanpur units in their declaration No. 1/95-96 w.e.f. 1-5-95 under Rule 173B, the fact that their Thane unit had opted out of the SSI scheme was not brought to the knowledge of their jurisdictional Central Excise authorities". 8. We are not able to agree to the contention that it was a deliberate attempt on the part of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
