2005 (10) TMI 13

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ct falling under Chapter Heading No. 1702.30 of CETA, 1985 is payable. A show cause notice was issued alleging that the Respondents evaded payment of Central Excise Duty during the period December 1992 to August 1997, of Rs. 89,78,618/-. Penalty under Section 11A was proposed and extended period of limitation was invoked. 3.The Respondents contended before the Commissioner that : (a) The process starting with preparation of solution till addition of alcohol is continuous process; (b) Sugar syrup remains in the state of over-saturated solution due to large proportion of sugar in pure water and is therefore not a commercially viable product; (c) It is not marketable as such as it comes into existence during the process of manufacture; (d) It....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s a shelf life; that for a product to be marketable it need not be bought and sold in the market; that it is enough if the goods are being capable of marketed. In regard to limitation it was argued that the Respondents did not file a classification declaration and that they removed the goods without payment of duty and therefore larger period of limitation is invocable. 6.Heard both sides. 7.It is seem from the Commissioner's order that he set aside the demand for December 1992 to May 1997 on the ground that it is barred by limitation applying the ratio of the Supreme Court's ruling in the case of Padmini Products - 1989 (43) E.L.T. 195. In this case the Supreme Court held that mere inaction on the part an assessee cannot be construed as ....