2003 (9) TMI 498

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e Appellant. Shri M.K. Gupta, Jt. CDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : Jyoti Balasundaram, Member (J)]. - Vide the impugned order the Commissioner of Central Excise has confirmed a duty demand of Rs. 1,05,37,293/- and imposed a penalty of equal amount on the manufacturer and penalties of Rs. 5,00,000/- and Rs. 2,50,000/- respectively on its General Manager and the Assistant Manager (Exci....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t of production or manufacture of such goods". read with Rule 9 of the Central Excise Valuation (Determination of Price of Excisable Goods) Rules, 2000 as per which : "when the assessee so arranges that the excisable goods are not sold by an assessee except to or through a person who is related in the manner specified in either of sub-clauses ..........of sub-section (3) of Section 4 of the ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s stage. However, having regard to the fact that admittedly the entire amount of duty was available by way of Modvat/Cenvat credit, we see prima facie substance in the applicants' contention that the allegation of suppression with intention to evade payment of duty so as to invoke the larger period of limitation cannot be sustained in the light of the Larger Bench decision in the case of Jay Yushi....