2007 (2) TMI 144

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....od April 1990 to 15-12-1999 was confirmed by issuing a show-cause notice on 17-3-2004 and penalty is imposed. The brief facts of the case are that the appellants are engaged in the manufacture of brass rods, and from the brass rods they are manufacturing brass wires. The appellants were availing the benefit of small scale exemption in respect of brass rods. As per notification, the benefit is avai....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e was issued for demanding duty from April 1990 (sic) (April 1999) to 15-12-99 in respect of brass rods which were more than 10 Feet long asking for duty in respect of brass rods after denying the benefit of notification on the ground that the same were more than 10 feet. The adjudicating authority confirmed the demand and imposed the penalty. The appellant filed appeal the same was dismissed. ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... issued within six months from the date of seizure, therefore the demand is not time barred. As in the present proceedings, the duty is demanded in respect of the goods cleared by the appellant without payment of duty. 5. The contention of the appellant is that demand is time-barred. Admitted facts are that on 31-10-1999 officers of Revenue visited the premises of the appellant and seized quant....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....first show-cause notice issued then allegation of suppression of facts in the second show-cause notice based on the same facts is not sustainable. The Hon'ble Supreme Court held as under :-  "Allegation of suppression of facts against the appellant cannot be sustained. When the first SCN was issued all the relevant facts were in the knowledge of the authorities. Later on, while issuing the....