1997 (2) TMI 262

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....hri Y.R. Kilaniya, JDR, for the Respondents. [Order per : G.R. Sharma, Member (T)]. - The captioned appeal has been filed by the appellants against the order of the ld. Collector (Appeals). The ld. Collector (Appeals) in his order, held that it is on record that the demand of duty on the disputed molasses had already been issued on 20-3-1989 under Rule 9(2) which was within the period of six....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....dication order of the Asstt. Collector, a mention of these two letters claimed by the appellants to have sent to the Central Excise Authorities has been made. We observe that show cause notice was issued on 17th October, 1989 for stocks lying on 28-2-1989. The lower authorities did not accept this contention of the appellants on the ground that the show cause notice was issued within six months fr....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the instant case was issued on 17-10-1989 for stocks available on 28-2-1989. He submits that thus the show cause notice for demanding duty is beyond a period of six months and therefore, is time-barred. 4. Shri Y.R. Kilaniya, the ld. DR appearing for the respondent submits that since the permission to store molasses in kachcha pits was withdrawn and therefore, the period of six months is t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....-1-1989. Thus the demand is beyond a period of six months in either case. Now the question is whether there was any suppression of any information or misstatement on the part of the assessee, we find that the assessee by their letter dated 27th Dec. 1987 had sought permission of the department to remove the molasses lying in kutcha pits outside the factory premises. We also observe that on 28-11-1....