TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2001 (8) TMI 1126
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r dispensing with the condition of pre-deposit of duty and penalty amount, I take up the appeal itself with the consent of both the sides. 2. Vide the impugned orders Modvat credit of Rs. 8,27,125.00 availed by the appellant in respect of capital goods Cross Direction Basis Weight Control was denied on the ground that the same is not covered by the definition of capital goods under Rule 57Q ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e authorities along with RG 23C Part-I & II register at the time of filing of returns. As such he submits that the entire case were before the Revenue. In fact the show cause notice issued on 2-1-96 has been issued on the same very set of facts and records maintained by them. In this scenario he submits that the demand in question is barred by limitation of six months as provided under rule 57U. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ere within their jurisdiction and powers to call for more information from the appellant. To raise the demand after a period of two years on the same set of records and documents without any new factor coming to light reflects upon the casual attitude of the central excise authorities and blaming the assessees subsequently with suppression or mis-statement so as to justify their action of invocati....