2019 (7) TMI 911

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....It is seen from a perusal of the order of the original authority that the demand is for Rs. 6,26,485/-, against bill of entry no. 851991/27.07.2008 and 850930/15.07.2008 for the import of 33.2448 metric tonnes and 40.63 metric tonnes of 'new and unused prime quality of universal beam', that, though the show cause notice dated 4th November 2009 did not invoke proviso to section 28(1) of Customs Act, 1962 it was not relevant to demand duty for the normal period of limitation. As neither the original authority nor the appellate authority have considered the issue on merit, it would appear that the impugned order has restricted itself only to the extent of finding that the demand was not barred by limitation. It is also important to note that R....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the appellant herein had sought additional time to reply. The reply made on 19th November 2008 was followed by consultative letter dated 16th September 2009. In this letter, the request to be heard personally was rejected with a clear advice that unless the show cause notice is issued, the stage of personal hearing would not be reached following which the show cause notice appeared to have been issued. 5. Learned Counsel for the appellant draws our attention to the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Metal Forgings v. Union of India [2002 (146) ELT 241 (SC)] and Union of India v. Charak Pharmaceuticals (India) Ltd [2003 (254) ELT 354 (SC)] which has followed the earlier decision that. '10. It is an admitted fact that a show cause n....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....w cause if he has any objection for such demand. The said notice also will have to be served on the assessee within the said period which is either 6 months or 5 years as the facts demand. Therefore, it will be futile to contend that each and every communication or order could be construed as a show cause notice. For this reason the above argument of the Revenue must fail. xxxx 17. For the reasons stated above, we are of the opinion that in the absence of a show cause notice it is not open to the Revenue to make a demand on the appellants even assuming that the contention of the Revenue in regard to classification as held by the Tribunal is correct.' 6. The law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court is that no proceedings under section ....