2015 (10) TMI 1361

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d the demand to be time barred. However, demands of Rs. 20,528.00 and Rs. 919.00 were held by the First Appellate Authority to be within the period of limitation. The First Appellate Authority also set aside the equivalent penalty imposed upon M/s Mahalaxmi Fabrics Mills Ltd. Revenue has filed Appeal No.E/961/2007 with respect to setting aside of demand on time bar issue and also setting aside of the penalty. Appeal No.539/2007 has been filed by M/s Mahalaxmi Fabrics Mills Ltd on the ground that the demand is not sustainable on the ground that M/s Mahalaxmi Fabrics Mills Ltd and M/s Mahalaxmi Exports Ltd cannot be treated as related persons. 2. Shri J. Nair, learned Authorised Representative appearing on behalf of the Revenue argued that....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... That M/s Mahalaxmi Exports Ltd are also availing rebate facility in addition to being entitled to deemed credit on the grey fabrics. It was his case that his client would have gained much more in terms of credit and rebate and there cannot be any intention to evade payment of duty as argued by the Revenue in this appeal. 4. Heard both the sides and perused the case records. So far as the appeal filed by the Revenue regarding extended period invocable is concerned, it is observed from the order passed by the First Appellate Authority that the demand for the extended period was not only confirmed on the basis of Apex Court's judgment in the case of M/s Nizam Sugar Factory Ltd (supra) but also by giving detailed finding in Para 10 and 11 ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.....30.11.2004 and dt.06.01.2006 are very much in time. Thus, the demand for Rs. 20,528/- and for Rs. 919/- had rightly been confirmed on merit as well as on limitation. Therefore, that part of the order is hereby confirmed." 5. From the facts as narrated by the First Appellate Authority, it is clear that M/s Mahalaxmi Fabrics Mills Ltd was clearing the goods on provisional basis as the exact amount of costing could be arrived at only at the end of the financial year. As the entire facts of the valuation and clearances were within the knowledge of the Department, the First Appellate Authority has correctly held that the extended period under proviso to Section 11A cannot be invoked and also that no penalty under Section 11AC of the Central ....