TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2000 (9) TMI 852
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....pellant. Shri V.K. Chaturvedi, SDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : Archana Wadhwa, Member (J)].- Vide the impugned Order, the Commissioner of Central Excise, Patna has confirmed the demand of duty of Rs. 9,71,732.90 and has imposed a personal penalty of Rs. 50,000.00. 2. Arguing on the appeal, Shri K.B. Chakraborty, learned Advocate submits that the said demand has been co....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... are to the effect that the assessee was under a bona fide belief that a licence was not required to be taken in view of the long-standing practice of availability of the benefit of Notification No. 208/83 even subsequent to 1-3-1986, he submits that the demand, in that case, was held to be barred by limitation. Reliance has also been placed upon various decisions of the Supreme Court. Our attenti....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....cks and Weights. 4. After hearing Shri V.K. Chaturvedi, learned S.D.R. for the Revenue, we find force in the contentions of the learned Advocate for the appellants. 5. The adjudicating authority has taken note of the appellants' letter dated 29-3-1988, but has discarded the same as not sufficient to give knowledge to the Department. For better appreciation of the contents of the sa....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....applicability and percentage of amount to be liable. Also please confirm us that what rebate is allowable for the S.S.I. Unit. Kindly confirm us immediately." A bare reading of the above letter shows that the appellants had placed all the facts before the Revenue and it cannot be said that anything was suppressed by them with an intention to evade payment of duty. The adjudicating authority has....