2016 (9) TMI 1230

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Mr. Anil G. Shakkarwar, Member (Technical) Shri B.L. Narasimhan & Shri Vaibhav Dixit, Advocates for the Appellant (s) Shri H.M. Dixit, Asstt. Commissioner (A.R.) for the Department ORDER The present two appeals are arising out of a common impugned order. Therefore, they are being taken up together for disposal. 2.   The appellants are holding Central Excise Registration an....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....- for the period from June, 2008 to February, 2012 under proviso to Sub-Section 1 of Section 11A of Central Excise Act, 1944, with other proposals for interest and penalty. It was also proposed to impose personal penalty on Shri Trilok Anand, Director of appellant-company. 3.   The appellants contested the show cause notice on the grounds that as per Rule 3(b) of Rules of Interpretati....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ny provisions of Law or Rules made thereunder, and they did not have any  intention to evade duty. Therefore, the show cause notice is hit by limitation. The said show cause notice was adjudicated through Order-in-Original No.03/Commr./MRT-I/2014, dated 09.01.2014, wherein the Original Authority has classified the goods manufactured by appellants under Tariff Item No.4203 2110, and confirmed ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ued by Government of India, the goods manufactured by them, were shown to have been classifiable under Tariff Item No.950621 and, therefore, extended period is not applicable in this case. 5.   Heard the learned Counsel, who has reiterated the arguments made before the Original Authority and grounds of appeal. 6.   The A.R. for the Revenue has reiterated the findings of O....