TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2011 (7) TMI 697
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....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 penalty. The learned SDR has reiterated ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e. 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 bearing on Section 11AC penalty, is that the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 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 nothing about the moulds and dies was, in fac....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....vant 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 reduced to Rs 10,000/- after holding that Section 11AC was ....