TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2014 (2) TMI 636
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t of one of their product 'pentane' which was being cleared by the appellant under sub heading 2711.19 of the Central Excise Tariff as other 'petroleum gases and other gaseous hydrocarbons' and paying Central Excise duty @ 8% ad valorem after availing of the benefit of sl. No. 24 of notification No.6/2000-CE dated 1.3.2000 and sl. No.34 of notification No.3/2001-CE dated 1.3.2001. 2. The Revenue was of the view that the product was correctly classifiable under sub-heading 2710.90 of the Central Excise Tariff as other 'petroleum oils obtained from bituminous minerals other than crude, preparations not elsewhere specified or included, containing by weight 70% or more of petroleum oils or of oils obtained from bituminous minerals, these oils ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e and no appeal stand filed against that. He draws our attention to another order passed by the Commissioner in the case of M/s. GAIL, Vijaypur vide its order No. 80-88/Commr/CEX/IND/2005 dated 11.11.2005 wherein the Show cause notice proposing change in classification were dropped by him by observing that the correct classification of 'pentane' in under heading 2711.19. As such, he pleads for allowing the appeal on point of limitation. 3. We have also heard the learned DR who reiterated the reasoning of the adjudicating authority. 4. After appreciating the submissions made by both sides, we find that present appeal can be disposed of on the point of limitation itself. Demand for the period stand raised by the show cause notice dated 10.8....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Act, 1944 is available to the department for recovery of short paid duty in respect of the clearances of the pentane mixture. On going through the records I find that the assessee company had filed a classification declaration under the then Rule 173B of the Central Excise rules, 1944 on 3rd April 2001 wherein they had declared the pentane mixture as one of the products being manufactured by them and its classification had been declared as 2711.19 and the rate of duty as 8% adv. Along with classification declaration a detailed note describing the manufacturing process had also been enclosed. This classification declaration had been received in the Range office on 04.04.2001. No objection has been raised to the classification of pentane mixt....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... demand of duty is time barred." 6. The appellant relied on the Hon'ble Supreme Court decision in the case of Pahwa Chemicals Pvt. Ltd. vs. Commissioner [2005 (189) ELT 257 (SC) as also on the decision of Supreme Court in the case of Densons Pultretaknik v. Commissioner [2003 (155) ELT 211 (SC)] laying down that claim of classification under different heading then the one adopted by the Revenue does not amount to suppression of facts. To the similar effect is another decision of Supreme Court in the case of O K Play (India) Ltd. vs. Commissioner [2005 (180) ELT 300 (SC). 7. We also take note of another decision of the Commissioner in respect of Vijaypur unit of same appellant wherein he has observed as under: "5. The above S....