1989 (4) TMI 172

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Shri C.P. Arya, S.D.R., for the Respondent. [Order per : R. Jayaraman, Member (T) ]. - For hearing the applicants appeal on merits, they are required to deposit a sum of Rs. 68,176.23, towards duty and Rs. 500/- towards penalty. 2. Shri Willington Christian, the learned Advocate, on behalf of the applicants, contended that the order of the authorities below is prima facie bad in law. ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

...., 1986 to October, 1986, a show cause notice came to be issued only on 16-11-1987, much beyond a period of six months. In the show cause notice, there was no allegation of suppression but reference to Rule 173Q was made for imposition of penalty. If the notice is taken as alleging suppression of facts, then it ought not to have been issued by the Supdt., since as per the amendment to Section 11A p....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....DVAT credit no time limit is prescribed for recovery. 4. After hearing both sides, we agree with Shri Willington Christian that the notice is prima facie time-barred. If it is to be held that extended period has been invoked, there should have been specific allegation of misdeclaration etc. which are not found in the show cause notice. In case such an allegation is said to have been made, then ....