Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: (i) whether the show cause notice under section 11A was duly issued and served; (ii) whether the demand was barred by limitation under section 11A.
Issue (i): Whether the show cause notice under section 11A was duly issued and served.
Analysis: The notice had been issued and the record contained an admission indicating receipt of the notice. On that basis, the objection that service was not proved by acknowledgement or affidavit was rejected. Under section 11A, what is material is service of notice when disputed, not proof of a particular mode of service.
Conclusion: The issue was decided against the appellant and in favour of the Revenue.
Issue (ii): Whether the demand was barred by limitation under section 11A.
Analysis: The relevant date for duty related to the monthly return filed under the statutory scheme. Since the return for July 1982 was filed on 13-08-1982, the demand relating to that month fell within six months from the relevant date. The claim was therefore not time-barred on the facts found.
Conclusion: The limitation objection was rejected and the demand was held to be within time.
Final Conclusion: The appeal failed on both the service and limitation objections, and the confirmed demand was sustained.
Ratio Decidendi: For a demand under section 11A, service of notice is essential and the limitation period runs from the statutorily defined relevant date, which in the case of periodical returns is the date on which the return is filed.