2013 (5) TMI 432

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....: After hearing both the sides, we find that the appellant is engaged in the manufacture of forgings and forged articles of iron and steel. They had earlier classified the goods w.e.f. 1.3.89 claiming the classification under heading 17326.19 attracting duty at the rate of 15%. However, the classification was approved by the proper officer on 30.08.90 shifting the same to heading 8483 and 8708 ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....98. The same was confirmed by the Assistant Commissioner alongwith confirmation of interest @ 20%. However, he refrained from imposing any penalty on the appellant. The said order of the Assistant Commissioner was confirmed by the Commissioner (Appeals). Hence, the present appeal. 4. The only ground canvassed by the ld. Advocate before us is that in the light of the previous development, it can....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....on in the case of CCE, Baroda vs. Cotspun Limited 1999 (113) ELT 353 (SC) wherein, when the classification list approved by the revenue, the Hon'ble Court held that the demand cannot be raised even within the limitation period as provided under Section 11A. However, the said declaration law was neutralized by retrospective legislation amending the provision of Section 11A and laying down that even....