2009 (10) TMI 694

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....n sites for completion of irrigation schemes. The assessee has obtained the Central Excise Registration for Manufacture of RC pipes and collars in 1982. Prior to March 1993 the assessee was clearing the RCC Pipes and Collars manufactured by them on payment of duty. However, after Notification No. 74/93-C.E. was issued, the clearances were being made without payment of central excise duty availing exemption meant for factories owned by Government and goods manufactured for Govt. department. By notification in Official Gazette, Government established Maharashtra Krishana Valley Development Corporation. However, no changes were made as regards RCC Pipe Factory except the so called change in constitution. Even after this the assessee continued ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Executive Engineer, Irrigation Department v. CCE, Pune-I - 2003 (162) E.L.T. 569 (Tri. - Mum.). (iv) Assistant Engineer (Civil) v. CCE, Raipur - 2008 (232) E.L.T. 628 (Tri-L.B.). 4. We have considered the submissions made by the learned DR. We take note of the fact that the show-cause notice was issued beyond the normal period of limitation under Section 11A. The department has taken stand that assessee has suppressed the fact that they had lost the status of Government factory to avail the benefit of exemption Notification No. 74/93-C.E. The respondent has submitted in this regard as under : - "(i) The above statement of department is not correct because in fact the assessee is not a commercial money making institute but is a statutory ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....reated to be genuine document for notice of public or concerned person. When a document is binding on lay man the same must be binding on appellate authorities also. One cannot say that though a matter is published through Official Gazette is not known to me because it is not personally known to him by a special service. (iii) The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Ganesh Das Bhojraj - 2000 (116) E.L.T. 431 (S.C.) has held that Gazette is admissible in evidence being official record evidencing public affairs and the court is required to presume its contents as genuine under Sections 35 and 38 read with Section 81 of the Evidence Act unless contrary is proved. It is also otherwise held that it is to be treated as a official notice to pers....