1997 (12) TMI 418

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Shri D.S. Negi, SDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : Shiben K. Dhar, Member (T)]. -  This appeal is directed against Order No. 44/89 of Addl. Collector of Central Excise. 2.  Arguing for the appellants, the ld. Advocate submits that they have filed the Classification List in March, 1986 declaring the impugned goods as bushes and claimed classification as articles of copper an....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....in correspondence made by the Department in 1986 itself intimating to them the full description of the products. 3. Ld. DR submits that in 1987, when they issued the first show cause notice, it was done to protect the normal period of limitation and earlier period involved calculations which always takes time. In view of this, it cannot be said that there was no suppression at all. The app....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ondence at pages 27 and 28. Through letter dated 16-4-1986 to Superintendant, the appellants informed the Department that they are manufacturers of Sintered Products and Ferrites and that they have filed the classification list which is yet to be approved by the Asstt. Collector. Again through letter dated 20-3-1986 placed at P-28 of the appeal papers, the appellants submitted a new classification....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....p;In these circumstances, it is difficult to hold that there was any ingredient mentioned in proviso to Section 11A which could be invoked to sustain larger period. When facts are in possession of both sides, larger period obviously cannot be invoked. 6.  In view of this, we hold that appellants succeeded on the issue of limitation. It was pleaded by the ld. Advocate that this appeal relat....