TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (11) TMI 147
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e Appellant Mr. Pakshirajan, AR - For the Respondent ORDER Per : S.S. Garg The present appeal is directed against the impugned order dated 27.2.2004 passed by the Commissioner (A) whereby the Commissioner (A) has rejected the appeal of the appellant. 2. Briefly the facts of the present case are that the appellant are engaged in the manufacture of electric wires, cables and connect....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....cted the appeal of the appellant and upheld the Order-in-Original, hence, the present appeal. 3. Heard both the parties and perused the records. 4. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the impugned order is not sustainable in law as the same has been passed without considering the facts and law on the point. He further submitted that the Commissioner (A) has g....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....mount received by them does not form part of the transaction value as the said amount was received in connection with permitting the agency to use the name 'Farcom' for their trading purposes. He also submitted that there is no suppression on the part of the appellant with intention to evade payment of duty. 5. On the other hand, the learned AR reiterated the findings of the impugned ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rcom'. Further, we find that since the appellant has not suppressed the facts from the Department and entertained a bona fide belief that the royalty amount is not to be included in the assessable value, therefore the extended period of limitation is not invokable. Further, we find that the appellant is also not liable to pay the penalty in view of the fact that there was no intention to evade pay....