2002 (4) TMI 854

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Appellant. Shri Uma Shankar, DR, for the Respondent. [Order per : Jyoti Balasundaram, Member (J)]. -  By the impugned order, the Commissioner of Central Excise has confirmed a duty demand of Rs. 16,98,52,336/- and imposed a penalty of Rs. 15,22,51,210/- under Sec. 11AC of the Central Excise Act and a penalty of Rs. 25 lakhs under Rule 173Q of the Central Excise Rules. The demand of ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....deposit of penalty. 3. We have heard Shri Rajsinghani, ld. Counsel who contends that the demands raised in the show cause notices are barred by limitation since the applicants never suppressed any material facts and the prices were revised by Ministry of Petroleum with retrospective effect only under communication dated 18-10-99. He also submits that the applicants throughout the period in....