2002 (11) TMI 649

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....pellant. Shri Jagdish Singh, JDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : Justice K.K. Usha, President]. - The assessee challenges the order passed by Commissioner of Central Excise, Delhi-II confirming the duty demand of Rs. 30,26,286/- and imposing penalty of a similar amount. 2. The appellant is engaged in the manufacture of various articles of steel and aluminium such as, upper hinge....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....llant had enclosed the invoices under the cover of which the goods were sold to the buyers. While so, a show cause notice dated 1-9-2002 was received by the assessee proposing to reclassify the above goods under Chapter 84 as parts of refrigerator. The extended period of limitation was invoked on the allegation of suppression and misdeclaration. The Commissioner confirmed the proposal in the show ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....informed that these goods were being utilised in the manufacture of refrigerator. 4. We have gone through the declarations filed by the appellant under Rule 173D of the Central Excise Rules. We find that the assessee has referred to specific items of its products such as plain washer, aluminum washer etc. RT 12 Returns also refer to the specific items. It is relevant to note that along wit....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....lier, the proposal in the show cause notice is based on the very same document filed by the assessee and as mentioned above. Therefore, it is clear that the assessee had not in any manner misdeclared the product or had suppressed any relevant fact which had led the department to believe that the classification was correctly held under Heading 7326.19 and 7616.10. We, therefore, hold that the Reven....