TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1993 (10) TMI 140
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r packing playing cards manufactured by the appellants were being assessed to duty under T.I. 17(4) read with Notification No. 67/82 dated 28-2-1982. After the issue of Notification No. 144/82 dated 22-4-1982 they discontinued the payment of Central Excise duty and maintenance of Central Excise records even though they were asked by the Superintendent to file a revised classification. On test of the sample of the appellants' product, the examiner opined that the material of the 'Printed Cartons' manufactured by the appellants was made of paper board made of chemical pulp backed by PVC film on one side backed by PVC film. The appellants were served with a show cause notice dated 29-9-1983 demanding duty amounting to Rs. 35,049-30 on the grou....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tion were made of Mill Board and PVC film, the appellants were not eligible for the exemption under Notification No. 144/82 dated 22-4-1982 and extended period of 5 years under the proviso to Section 11A was attracted on account of the deliberate attempt on the part of the appellants to evade payment of duty by suppressing the facts. 2. On behalf of the appellants, the learned Consultant Shri Gopal Prasad appeared before us. He stated that the Assistant Collector was correct in holding that the demand was time-barred. He added that appellants had been paying duty on Printed Cartons since March, 1982 but after the issue of Notification No. 144/82 dated 22-4-1982 they discontinued the payment of duty. He added that on being asked to file a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tral Excise duty on Printed Cartons manufactured by them and they neither filed a revised classification list despite being asked to do so by the Superintendent nor did they respond to any of the letter of the Range Officer. He stated that under these circumstances the demand could not be held as time-barred. He further contended that there was no force at all in the appellants contention that under Notification No. 144/82 Printed Cartons of Mill board having backing of PVC film were eligible for exemption. He argued that other ingredients upto one third the weight were permissible in the materials constituting the mill board and the relevant provision in the notification was not applicable to any other backing material used for making mill....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e to the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 (1 of 1944), from the whole of the duty of excise leviable thereon, subject to the condition specified in the corresponding entry in Column (3) of the said Table. THE TABLE S. No. Description of boxes/cartons Condition (1) &nbs....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed homogeneous board, having a thickness exceeding 0.50 millimetre and made out of mixed waste papers with or without screening and mechanical pulp, but without any colouring matter being added thereto. In terms of Proviso (i) to the Explanation use of other materials in the manufacture of mill board was permissible as long as the weight of such material did not exceed one third in weight of the total weight of the ingredients. It is evident that the words 'Other material' in Proviso (i) referred to materials which went into the making of the board as ingredients and not those which were pasted to the board or used as laminating material. This reasoning finds confirmation from Proviso (ii) in which it was laid down that the board in questio....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....emand issued on 29-9-1983 for the period 1-3-1982 to 31-8-1983 was time-barred. The department's case is that on issue of Notification No. 144/82 the appellants had stopped paying duty on their product and from that date onwards they also stopped the maintenance of the Central Excise records. In the impugned order the Collector (Appeals) has held that the extended period under the proviso to Section 11A was invokable on account of suppression of facts since for confirmation of the demand the appellants had not furnished the information sought by the Assistant Collector in his letters dated 20-8-1982, 27-1-1983, 15-2-1983 and 2-6-1983 and they had also failed to file the revised classification list claiming exemption under Notification No. 1....