1997 (4) TMI 252

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....mposed a penalty of Rs. 5 lakhs on the appellants herein in terms of Rule 173Q of the Central Excise Rules. 2. The appellants are manufacturers of heavy steel structurals falling for classification under Chapter 73 of the Central Excise Tariff Act at their factory at Bharatpur (Rajasthan). In addition, they are also engaged in the fabrication, erection and commissioning of various items of steel structurals at several site locations all over India. Once such activity pertains to execution of contract granted to the appellants by the Tanakpur Hydro Electric Project situated at Tanakpur District Nainital. The appellants had taken out a Central Excise license in 1988 for the activity at the above mentioned project site. For the purpose....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....r. The difficulty expressed by the Chartered Accountant is that the unit has been closed for the past several years and the papers cannot be located. His main argument is that the demand is barred by limitation and in this connection, he draws my attention to the correspondence exchanged between the department and the appellants clearly showing that the fact of availing of credit on inputs not declared viz. MS plates, pipes, angels and channels was very well within the knowledge of the department and further RT 12 returns also would show that the department had knowledge of taking of credit by the appellants on the above mentioned inputs which had not been declared in Rule 57G declaration. He therefore, submits that in view of the fact that....