2001 (1) TMI 479

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 Appellant. Shri V.K. Chaturvedi, SDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : Archana Wadhwa, Member (J)]. - The prayer in the application is for dispensing with the pre-condition of deposit of duty of Rs. 11,62,500/- and an equivalent amount of personal penalty imposed upon the applicant - appellant on the ground that the conveyors system manufactured by them and cleared on payment of dut....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nocked down condition have to be treated as parts of mill house equipments and cannot be considered as a complete conveyor system. Shri Bagaria argues that the issue is squarely covered in their favour by the earlier decision of the Tribunal reported in 1999 (107) E.L.T. 774 (T) in the case of Viswa Industrial Co. (P) Ltd. v. CCE, Calcutta whereas under similar set of facts and circumstances, the ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....m August 1993 to January 1994 and the show cause notice was issued on 6-3-1996. The appellants, submits the ld. Advocate, had been filing the classification lists and price lists etc. The only ground for invoking the extended period of limitation against the appellant is that in their classification list the appellants did not declare that they would be clearing the various parts of the conveyor s....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ed at the assessees' factory and removed to site of erection cannot be called collection of parts of the conveyor system. As regards limitation Shri Chaturvedi submits that returns filed by the appellants are still pending assessments and as such the question of limitation does not arise. 5. In his rejoinder Shri Bagaria submits that in the case relied upon by the ld. adjudicating authorit....