2010 (5) TMI 871

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Advocate For the Respondent : Shri Avinash Thete, SDR JUDGEMENT Per : Mrs. Archana Wadhwa, After dispensing with the condition of pre-deposit of duty of ₹ 20,76,981/- and penalty of identical amount, we proceed to decide the appeal itself, inasmuch as we find that the issue is covered with the precedent decision of the Tribunal. 2. Appellants are engaged in the manufacture of pharmac....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the matter was referred to the Larger Bench and the issue was not free from doubts. As such, he submits that the entire demand is beyond the period of limitation, the appeal be allowed on the ground of time-bar. 3. After hearing the learned DR, who support the impugned order on the ground of invocation of longer period, we find that the Tribunal in the above referred judgment of M/s. Marsha Phar....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....9;ble Supreme Court has held that circulars beneficial for the assessee are bound to be implemented by the officers of the department, there is no such law laid down by the Hon'ble Court that the circular issued by the Board is binding on the assessees as well as on the Tribunal. Therefore, it cannot be said since Board issued a circular the assessee is not entitled to entertain an opinion whi....