TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2013 (8) TMI 386
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Public Sector Undertaking, are a manufacturer of Vee Belts and Fan Belts. Proceedings were initiated against them on the ground that during the period from April, 1983 to July, 1984 and from August, 1984 to March, 1988, they undervalued their goods and thereby short-paid the Central Excise Duty amounting to Rs.59,36,050.82/-.Accordingly, show cause Notices were issued against them demanding duty along with a proposal for penalty under Rule 173Q of the rest while Central Excise Rules, 1944. The learned Commissioner confirmed the proposal in the show cause notice. Hence the present Appeal. 4. The contention of the Appellant is that they had entered into an Agreement with M/s. Goodyear India Ltd. on 11.6.1982 on the terms and conditions tha....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rlier Period was issued subsequently. The contention is that the show cause notice was issued on the ground of suppression of facts, whereas the learned Commissioner confirmed the demand on the ground that they had not filed the copy of the Agreement. The contention is that in their reply to the show cause notice, they submitted that they had filed the Agreement along with the Price Lists, the fact which has been recorded by the learned Commissioner in para 8(xvi) which reads as under: "8(xvi). The allegation about of the elements of cost was unfounded and without any material evidence, as a copy of the agreement dtd. 11/6/82 entered into with the said "GY" was made available to the department along with lists at the very ou....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....mmissioner was given the Agreement along with the Price Lists or they had given the information in the Price Lists itself. Therefore, the extended period is correctly invoked. 6. We have considered the submissions and perused the records. Undisputedly, for the period from August, 1984 to March, 1988, the first show cause notice was issued on 27.7.1989 and the second show cause notice for the period from April, 1983 to July, 1984 proposing for a demand of duty of Rs.7 lakh and odd was issued on 31.5.90. The fact that the Price-Lists were already approved, is also not dispute in this case. On perusal of the show cause notice, we find that the show cause notices were issued on the ground that the Appellant undervalued their goods in compari....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....h had been approved from time to time. The RT-12 returns also had been filed which have been scrutinized and approved. The department officials have visited the assessee's firm and the manufacturing process has been observed and seen. Before the classification list is approved, it is the duty of the proper officer to secertain the manufacturing process and verify the declarations filed by them. Although, the declaration made in the classification list is "Hydrochloric Acid (on 100% basis)" and duty has been paid as such, but the department's contention is that 100% HCL acid does not exist and they are manufacturers of 30 to 33%. All these aspects of the matter have been explained by the assessee and they have clearly contended that HCL does....