2017 (1) TMI 1178

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... P.V.B. Chary, Advocates for the Appellant. Sh. P.S. Reddy, Assistant Commissioner (AR) for the Respondent.  [Order per: Madhu Mohan Damodhar] Brief facts of the case are that, the Appellants are the manufacturers of Cable Jointing Kits (CJKs) which were held to be non-excisable. In the course of manufacture of the said product, an intermediate product named Heat Shrinkable Sleeves ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ate from the Cost Accountant confirming that the cost adopted includes various elements such as raw material cost, salaries and wages, power and fuel, repairs and maintenance, depreciation, administrative overheads related to the factory to the extent identifiable and other manufacturing expenses. Basing on the said information the differential duty to be payable by the appellants was quantified b....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....an order dated 25.09.2006 rejected their appeal. Aggrieved the appellant have filed these two appeals. 3. Today when the matter came up for hearing on behalf of appellant Ld. Counsel Sh. V.J. Sankaram submitted that they are contesting on the ground of limitation, and that in their own case for the earlier period Commissioner had set aside the demand on limitation, which was appealed against to....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... appeal does not bring up any dispute on merits. Appellant has challenged the order on limitation aspect only. We find that the requisite information has been sought by department on 01.12.2002 and appellant replied on 10.12.2002. However the Show Cause Notice was issued only on 29.12.2005. Appellant sought for assessment on provisional basis at the beginning itself, which was not however extended....