2011 (7) TMI 697

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... In this appeal filed by the department, one of the grounds raised by the appellants is that the learned Commissioner (Appeals) erred in holding a part of the demand of duty as time-barred even though the assessee had paid the entire amount of duty demanded by the original authority. Another objection raised by the appellant is that the learned Commissioner (Appeals) erred in dropping Section 11AC....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....riod of limitation was invokable in the case. He concluded that the demand of duty for the period beyond one year from the relevant date was barred by limitation. It appears, this finding of the learned Commissioner (Appeals) is beyond the scope of the appeal handled by him. The grievance now raised by the Revenue is justifiable. 3. Yet another finding of the Commissioner (Appeals), which has a....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....er (Appeals) found the fact that the assessee did not wilfully suppress this factual aspect. In this connection, it was noted that the price declaration filed by the party under Rule 173C (3A) had disclosed 'the fact of receiving the dies and moulds on loan basis or free of cost from their buyers'. The learned SDR has faulted this finding of the learned Commissioner (Appeals) by pointing out that ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....sessee, thus, appears to be in consonance with the relevant entry contained in their declaration filed under Rule 173C (3A).  From these materials, it would fairly appear that the finding of the learned Commissioner (Appeals) that the assessee did not suppress or misstate the relevant fact is fraught with non-application of mind. 5. The penalty imposed by the original authority has been re....