1999 (9) TMI 427

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....-4-1991 to M/s. Ashok Leyland by invoking proviso to Section 11A of Central Excise Act besides imposing penalty of Rs. 15,000/- under Rule 173Q of Central Excise Rules, 1944. Penalty of Rs. 10,000/- has also been imposed on M/s. Ashok Leyland Ltd. under Rule 209A of CE Rules whose appeal is not listed as the same has not been transferred from Special Bench at Delhi. 2. The issue before the Commissioner was (i) the manner of valuation of Engine Mounting Pads manufactured by appellants out of raw materials supplied by M/s. Ashok Leyland Ltd and (ii) whether the demand is time barred under Section 11A (1) of Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944. The Commissioner has noted that the price at which the appellants have sold the said item to ot....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ants are under invoice price assessment and other invoices along with GP and RT-12 returns had been filed for assessment and the RT-12 returns had been finally completed for the dispute period. He submits that invoices clearly showed the cost of raw materials. Therefore there was no other evidence or documents pointing out to the contrary, intention or conclusion to the fact that there was an attempt to suppress duty in the matter and hence demands are barred by time. He further relies on the judgment rendered in the case of Cetex Petrochemicals by final order No. 1244/98, dated 29-6-1998 by this very Bench on an identical issue. 4. Ld.DR Shri S.Kannan heavily relies on the findings given by the Commissioner in the impugned order and ....