2018 (2) TMI 783

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... is in appeal against the impugned order wherein learned Commissioner (Appeals) has dropped the show-cause notice issued to the respondent. Respondent also filed Cross Objection to the appeal filed by Revenue. 2. Brief facts of the case is that the respondent imported brass dross which has been used for manufacturing of brass ingots. Respondent was neither registered nor filed declaration before ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....er Notification 149/86 dated 01.03.1986 and 98/88 dated 01.03.88 shows that the respondent has suppressed the fact from the department. In the circumstance, extended period is rightly invocable therefore, the impugned order is to be set aside. He takes support of the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Eagle Flask Industries Ltd. v. CCE - 2004 (171) ELT 296 (SC) to say that condition....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....01.03.1986 to 31.03.1988 is barred by limitation as the activity of the respondent was in the knowledge of the Revenue in May itself, therefore extended period of limitation is not invocable. 5. Heard both sides and considered the submissions. 6. It is an admitted fact that the show-cause notice has been issued to the respondent by invoking extended period of limitation. As the activity of the r....