1997 (12) TMI 353

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Shri S. Nunthuk, JDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : J.H. Joglekar, Member (T)]. - The appellants in this case were operating under the benefit of Notification No. 175/86-C.E., dated 1-3-1986 and similar notifications in the earlier time. They were a unit registered with the D.G.T.D. which did not prevent them from benefiting under the notifications up to 30-10-1987 when the notificatio....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rned Advocate, stated that although the amendment denied the benefit of notification to the assessees, it was not a fact that the assessee had suppressed any fact to continue wrongful availment of the notification. He stated that the assessee did not know of this amendment. He referred to the assessee's letter to the department dated 15-5-1984 where at the time of surrendering of their licence, th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....aken therefrom. On this ground he has denied the claim of limitation. We are not impressed by this logic of the Adjudicating Authority. For the assessee the department is a single entity. Any communication made by the assessee with the department would continue to remain valid and intact even if the identity of a particular Officer undergoes a change or even where the gap between the point of time....