2018 (6) TMI 629

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... For the Respondent Shri R. Subramanian, AC (AR) Per Archana Wadhwa: After hearing both sides duly represented by Ms. Vishnu Priya, Advocate for the appellants and Shri R, Subramanian, AC (AR) for the Revenue, we note that the appellant is engaged in the manufacture of various chemicals, The dispute in the present appeal relates to the valuation of Epichlorohydrin [ECH, in short] cleared ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....th an identical issue and observed that statutory benefits allowed by statutory authorities cannot be additional consideration flowing to the manufacturer from their buyers. However, the said decision of the Tribunal was appealed against by Revenue before the Hon'ble Supreme Court and vide their order dated 09.08.2005 reported as 2005 (08) LCX 001, the same was reversed and it was observed tha....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....neswar reported in 2006 (206) E.L.T.728 (Tri.- Kolkata), wherein the demand raised was held to be barred by limitation. It was observed that the fact of use of advance licences was disclosed to the Revenue and as such there could be no fraud, collusion or mis-statement, thus, justifying invocation of extended period of limitation. It was further observed that when entire excise duty paid by the as....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ions of law and inasmuch as, the Tribunal in the case of M/s. IFGL Refractories Ltd., has interpreted the law in favour of the assessee, which stands reversed only subsequently, the appellant cannot be held guilty of any suppression or mis-statements Our attention also stands drawn to the majority decision of the Tribunal in the case of M/s. Reliance Industries Ltd Vs Commissioner of Central Excis....