1988 (10) TMI 158

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....or the Respondents. [Order per : K. Prakash Anand, Member (T)]. - In this case it is alleged by the department that respondents had a stock of 160.185 metric tonnes of steel ingots on 18-6-1977 on which duty had been paid at the rate of Rs. 200/- per metric tonne. Respondents rolled 31.741 metric tonnes of bars and flats, etc., out of this material and cleared them at nil rate of duty under ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....tity of steel ingots in stock on 18 June, 1977. There was no denial by the respondents that these ingots were utilized for manufacture of bars and flats. 3. However, the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), while upholding the demand of duty, ordered that it should be restricted to the normal period of six months as the facts were well within the knowledge of the jurisdictional Central E....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....f the department. In their appeal, the department has stated, on good grounds, that the respondents had cleared the goods without mentioning in the classification list that bars and flats were rolled out of the stock held on 18 June, 1977 and that they were chargeable to duty at the rate of Rs. 130/- per metric tonne as per First proviso to Notification No. 152/77. Nor had necessary information be....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t not only the relevant rules have not been cited for invoking the extended period, but there is no allegation in terms, which can justify the invoking of the extended period. 7. There are a number of cases in which this Tribunal has held that the period of 5 years cannot apply where there is no allegation in the show cause notice of fraud, collusion, wilful mis-statement or suppression of....