9911796707
TMI Blog1997 (9) TMI 110X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... classification list dated 1-3-1986 which was duly approved on 23-10-1986. The appellant removed its products for the period August, 1986 to February, 1987. The appellant claimed benefit of the Exemption Notification No. 208/83-C.E., dated 1-8-1983 (as amended by 79/86-C.E., dated 10-2-1986). One of the conditions for grant of benefit under that Notification was that the final products are made fr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Rs. 11,80,423.10 under Section 11A of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 read with the proviso thereto and penalty of Rs. 25,000/- under Rule 173Q of the Central Excise Rules. The Tribunal has upheld the Collector's order and dismissed the appellant's appeal. Hence, this further appeal by the assessee. 2.Two points were involved for decision by the Tribunal. The first related to the correct c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on, the Department has to establish willful suppression of fact. The proviso to Section 11A reads thus : "Provided that where any duty of excise has not been levied or paid or has been short-levied or short-paid or erroneously refunded by reason of fraud, collusion or any wilful mis-statement or suppression of facts, or contravention of any of the provisions of this Act or of the rules made there ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rue facts and the classification list submitted by the assessee had been duly approved under which the removal was made.
5.We are, therefore, satisfied that the proviso to Section 11A is not attracted in the present case. That being so, the show cause notice is clearly beyond the available period of limitation. This alone is sufficient to allow the appeal.
6.The appeal is accordingly allowed. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
