2000 (10) TMI 261

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Shri J.P. Kaushik, Advocate, for the Respondent. [Order per : P.G. Chacko, Member (J)]. - The appellants were engaged in the manufacture of Axle Beam Assembly (Chapter Heading No. 87.08 of the Central Excise Tariff Act) on job work basis. During the period February, 1991 to July, 1995, they supplied axle beam assembly to M/s. Punjab Tractor Limited (PTL) after fitting therein the bushes su....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....fully suppressed the fact regarding fitment of bushes supplied by M/s. PTL under Rule 57F(2) of the Central Excise Rules for job work, with intent to evade payment of duty leviable on axle beam assembly. The party contested the show-cause notice. The jurisdictional Assistant Commissioner, who adjudicated the dispute, confirmed the above demand of duty and imposed a penalty of Rs. 3,25,000/- under ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ushes was includible in the assessable value of axle beam assembly manufactured and cleared by the appellants to M/s. PTL during the period of dispute, the said issue does not survive for consideration. We are seized of the limited question whether the demand of duty was hit by limitation or not. We note that the lower appellate authority held the issue of time bar in favour of the assessees on th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he knowledge of the department or not. Prior to 1-4-1994 the party must have been getting the assessable value of axle beam assemblies approved from the department. However, they have not filed copies of these price lists to substantiate their claim that the fact of non-inclusion of the cost of bushes was in the knowledge of the department. After 1-4-1994, there was no mention on the invoice of th....