9911796707
TMI Blog2001 (8) TMI 250X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nder the provisions of Section 11AC along with the confirmation of interest under the provisions of Section 11AB of the Central Excise Act, 1944. Penalty of Rs. 85.00 lakh (Rupees eighty-five lakh) has been imposed upon the other appellant firm, M/s. National Thermal Power Corporation Ltd. (here-in-after referred to as NTPC) under the provisions of Rule 209A of Central Excise Rules, 1944. 2. M/s. OCCL were awarded with a Contract by M/s. NTPC for laying Cold Water Circulating Duct System which included escavation of earth for digging trenches, plinths, laying foundations and underground structures in layers/concrete beds for fixing the CWCD liners, fabrication and laying of mild steel CW liners of different diameters in underground trench ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e not required to pay excise duty on materials fabricated by them on M/s. NTPC premises and they should be exempted from payment of excise duty and the matter be taken up with NTPC authorities. 3.1 In this background, a show cause notice was issued to M/s. NTPC on 9-2-94 alleging that they were the manufacturer of C.W. Liners and were liable to observe the Central Excise formalities. Reply was filed by M/s. NTPC and a personal hearing was conducted on 13-7-94. It seems that thereafter, the said show cause notice was not proceeded ahead and no Order passed on the same. 3.2 After a gap of about 2½ years, another show cause notice dated 30-12-96 was issued to M/s. OCCL calling upon them to pay duty on the fabrication/manufacturing activity u ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Joint Commissioner of Customs and Central Excise, Bhubaneswar admitting that the earlier show cause notice dated 9-2-94 was issued to M/s. NTPC considering them as the manufacturer of excisable goods; that the whole tenor of the show cause notice indicate that Assistant Commissioner, Central Excise, Cuttack had wrongly issued the show cause notice, in a mistaken belief that M/s. NTPC was the manufacturer of excisable goods. It has been further mentioned in the said letter that the facts of the case clearly indicate that M/s. OCCL was the manufacturer of excisable goods and liable to pay Central Excise duty. The said letter further discloses that the earlier show cause notice issued by the Assistant Commissioner, ipso facto, becomes infr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
