2016 (12) TMI 19

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....cture of the biscuits. According to department, the Sugar Syrup manufactured and used captively by appellant, in further manufacture of exempted biscuits is excisable and therefore the appellant is liable to pay excise duty on sugar syrup in terms of Notification No. 67/1995-CE dated 16-03-1995. The appellant did not pay the same. Hence a Show Cause Notice dated 25-04-2012 was issued to the assessee demanding excise duty on the clearance of Sugar Syrup for the period from 01-03-2007 to 11-09-2011 amounting to Rs. 15,36,836/- along with interest and proposing to levy penalty. The Original Authority vide Order-In-Original No. 27/2013-Adjn.(ADC) C.Ex. dated 19-03-2013, confirmed the entire duty demand of Rs. 15,36,836/- and imposed equal penal....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....er. He argued that the Commissioner (Appeals) has erred in holding that since various circulars were issued by CBEC on the issue of excisability of sugar syrup, the issue was contentious and therefore, the allegation of suppression with intent to evade payment of duty cannot be alleged. He urged that the issuance of circulars by the Board is only to clarify the legal position on a particular issue. The fact of non payment of duty by the respondent came to the knowledge of the department only in 2012 and therefore, the show cause notice issued invoking extended period of five years is well within the four corners of law. 3. Against this, the ld. Counsel Shri R Muralidhar defended the findings in the impugned order. He submitted that sugar s....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....turing biscuits. On similar set of circumstances, the Tribunal Chennai in the case of Pepsico India Holding Ltd. Vs CCE Chennai 2009-(245)ELT- 707(Tri. Chen) set aside the demand as time barred. "4....it was in the show cause notice dated 15-5-2000 that the department suddenly came up with a case against the assessee in relation to sugar syrup and that too for an old period (May 1995 to April,1997). We also note that there was fluctuation of view sin the departmental circles over a long period. The period of dispute in this case is comprised in that period. In this connection, the reliance placed by the learned counsel on Duke& Sons Pvt.Ltd. Vs Commissioner-2004(178) E.L.T. 190(Tri.Mumbai) is apposite. In that case, though sugar syrup was....