2015 (10) TMI 280

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....period December 2002 to March 2003, the Respondents cleared the Electric Cables wrongly claiming exemption under Notification No.8/2002, dt.01.03.2002. He submits that the Central Excise Officers of DGCEI during the verification of the records, noticed that the Respondents wrongly availed exemption notification, which has not been disclosed to the Department. Hence, the extended period of limitation would be invoked. He submits that the Commissioner (Appeals) has erred in law and facts of the case, to drop the demand on limitation without considering the fact that the Respondents had not intimated the wrong availment of exemption notification. He relied upon the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Hi-Tech Needles Pvt. Vs CC Allahabad - ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... on the similar issue to the appellant for the part period December 2002 which has also been covered in the SCN under dispute for the period December 2000 to March, 2003 invoking extended period. It is surprising on the part of the department to issue SCN dt.09.12.2005 by invoking larger period (December 2000 to March 2003) on the grounds of suppression and mis-declaration by the appellant when show cause notice dt.08.09.2003 for the same issue for the part period of December 2002, has already been issued within the normal period of one year and adjudicated vide OIO No.2/AC/DMN/DEM/2004, dt.27.02.2004. 12. I further find myself disagreeing with the findings of the lower authority that by merely reflecting the facts in RT 12 regarding clear....