2014 (1) TMI 1647

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he said circumstances, the Department has issued a show cause notice dated 3-8-1998, wherein it has been specifically stated that by way of suppression of material facts, the appellant has evaded in paying Central Excise Duty. Under the said circumstances the appellant has been directed to pay the amount mentioned therein within the stipulated period. The demand made in the form of show cause notice, dated 3-8-1998 has been upheld in Order-in-Original No. 16 of 1999, dated 30-8-1999 by the Joint Commissioner of Central Excise, Madurai and the same has been challenged before the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Tiruchirapalli, wherein the demand made by the Department as well as order passed in order-in-original No. 16 of 1999 have ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....6. The learned counsel appearing for the respondents has contended that the appellant has been doing job works for M/s. Raghavendra Spinners Limited, Tirunelveli but the appellant without informing either the brand name or trade name of its products under the guise of job work has wilfully suppressed the same. Under the said circumstances, period of limitation of six months is not applicable and the proper period of limitation is five years and therefore, the final order passed by the CESTAT perfectly correct and the same does not require any interference. 7. From the rival submissions made on either side, the Court has to analyse as to whether the assessee has made wilful suppression of the details of goods produced under the ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....sp;The appellant/assessee has duly intimated the process of job work received from M/s. Raghavendra Spinners Limited, Tirunelveli. The only contention putforth on the side of the Department is that even though the assesses has fairly conceded that it has received job work from M/s. Raghavendra Spinners Limited, Tirunelveli it failed to intimate either brand name or trade name. In order to answer befittingly, the learned counsel appearing for the appellant/assessee has drawn the attention of the Court to the decision referred to earlier, wherein it has been clearly mentioned that failure to mention classification as supplied by assessee does not come within the purview of suppression of facts. Therefore, it is quite clear that there is no su....