1998 (3) TMI 300

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....hri K.K. Banerjee, Advocate, for the Respondent. [Order per : P.C. Jain, Member (T)]. -  Briefly stated, facts of the case are as follows : 1.1 The respondents herein were getting their value assessed in terms of the provisions of Rule 173C(11) as according to the permission given by the competent authority of the Central Excise. The said provisions stipulate that an assessee ma....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ondents instead of paying any duty to the department, purportedly on the ground of enjoyment of the benefit of Notification No. 175/86, was nevertheless charging duty at the tariff rate from the customers of its goods in the invoices issued by it. The respondents did not submit such invoices along with RT 12 returns for the month of April 1990 to September 1990. In asking for the invoices for the ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....which has been challenged by the Revenue in this appeal before us. 2. Ld. SDR, Shri T. Premkumar pointing out the aforesaid facts submits that the fact of extra realisation made by the respondents has come to the notice of the Revenue only on 14-12-1990 as mentioned in the show cause notice. The demand has been issued within three months thereafter by a show cause notice dated 11-3-1991. T....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....se of Seraikella Glass Works reported in 1997 (91) E.L.T. 497 paras 16 & 17. He, therefore, prays for allowing the Revenue's appeal and setting aside the impugned order to the extent of holding the demand for the period April 1990 to 10-9-1990 which is barred by time. 3. Opposing the contention, ld. Advocate, Shri K.K. Banerjee for the respondents reiterates the finding of the lower appell....