2013 (10) TMI 805

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....V. Prasad, JC (AR) ORDER Per P.K. Das; A common issue is involved in these applications and hence they are taken up together for hearing and disposal. 2. The applicants were engaged in the manufacture of cotton yarn under 100% EOU scheme. The unit was de-bonded on 5.2.2008 and they declared imported/indigenous capital goods available with them. Subsequently, during the audit, it was fo....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s further contended that the entire demand is barred by limitation. He submits that the officers physically verified the goods on 9.1.2008 and 10.1.2008 and therefore the demand of duty by show-cause notices dated 12.3.2010 and 10.6.2010 are barred by limitation. The next contention is that, in Appeal No. C/129/2012, they have got the EPCG licence and the demand is not sustainable. He further subm....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... barred by limitation, it is seen that the audit party detected the non-declaration of the machineries and therefore the limitation issue cannot be considered at this stay stage. Further, the policy issue would be looked into at the time of appeal hearing at length. Prima facie, we find that in Appeal No. C/129/2012 the applicant has obtained EPCG licence. It is also noted that after detection of ....