TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (8) TMI 1392
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ok Jindal (Judicial Member) The appellant is in appeal against the impugned order wherein the duty has been demanded from the appellant for the period December, 1997 to March, 1998 by re-classifying their product and by invoking extended period of limitation. 2. The facts of the case are that the appellant is the manufacture of various machinery parts and like goods. During the period in dispute....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....pellant is before us. 3. Ld. Counsel for the appellant fairly conceded that on merits, they have no case but he contested that extended period of limitation is not invokable in the facts of the case as the appellant has filed classification declaration well within advance i.e. on 29.08.97 declaring their products correctly and sough classification under CTH 8474 which was accepted by the Departme....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ly invoked. 5. Heard the parties. Perused the records. 6. On perusal of the records, we find that the appellant has filed classification declaration under Rule 173 B of the Central Excise Act, 1944 on 29.08.97 which is reproduced below:- 7. On examination of the declaration filed by the appellant, we observe that the appellant has clearly declared that they are manufacturer of various types of ....